1. No category

Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation
Measure 2010
May 2010
This is a National Statistics publication © Crown Copyright 2010
National Statistics are produced to high professional standards set out in the National Statistics Code of Practice.
They undergo regular assurance reviews to ensure that they meet customer needs.
They are produced free from any political interference.
Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction
Overview
Background
Consultation
2
2
3
4
Chapter 2: Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Introduction to Domains
Introduction to Indicators
Output Geography
5
5
6
7
Chapter 3: Domains
Income Deprivation
Employment Deprivation
Health Deprivation and Disability
Education Skills and Training Deprivation
Proximity to Services
Living Environment
Crime and Disorder
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
8
8
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
Chapter 4: Results
NIMDM 2010 Super Output Area Results
NIMDM 2010 Output Area Results
NIMDM 2010 Summary Measures
24
25
56
58
Technical Annex
Geography of Northern Ireland
Indicator Rates
Combination into Sub-Domains, Domains and
Multiple Deprivation Measure
Calculation of Output Area, Super Output Area
and Summary Measures
61
61
63
64
Annex A: Indicator Summary
70
Annex B: Deprivation Steering Group Members
73
Glossary
74
References
76
66
1
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Chapter 1: Introduction
Overview
This report contains the results of research carried out by
the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency
(NISRA) to identify small area concentrations of multiple
deprivation in Northern Ireland. The resulting measure, the
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure (NIMDM)
2010, replaces the NIMDM 2005 as the official measure of
spatial deprivation in Northern Ireland.
The NIMDM 2010 provides information on seven types or
‘domains’ of deprivation and an overall multiple deprivation
measure comprising a weighted combination of the seven
domains. The majority of results are presented at the Super
Output Area geography.
The following sections outline the background to
deprivation measures in Northern Ireland, including the
consultation exercise in 2009 and resulting statistical
content of the 2010 measures, before displaying the small
area results. Maps and summary measures are also
included in the results section. A CD is attached to hard
copies of the publication and available on request,
containing full results in spreadsheet form and presented in
interactive maps. All CD content is also directly available
from the NISRA website at
www.nisra.gov.uk/deprivation.htm.
The final sections of the report contain further details on the
geographical units used, indicator construction and the
combination of indicators into sub-domains, domains and
the overall multiple deprivation measure. Finally the
creation of the small area and summary measures at higher
geographies is explained.
Separate publications will follow providing guidance on the
use of the measures, particularly with respect to change
over time; and on recommendations for the creation of
future spatial measures of deprivation. A series of
dissemination events is planned for Autumn 2010 and will
be advertised via the NISRA website and deprivation
e-zine.
2
Background
Spatial measures of deprivation have been used to inform
policy and target areas of need in Northern Ireland since
the 1970s. Current uses of deprivation measures include
the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy and the Acute
Hospitals Resource Allocation Formula.
Early deprivation measures were based on the 1971, 1981
and 1991 Censuses while more recent measures of
deprivation in Northern Ireland have been based on
administrative data.
In the early 1990s a team from the Centre for Urban Policy
Studies in the University of Manchester, led by Professor
Brian Robson, was commissioned to create deprivation
measures for Northern Ireland. The resulting report, the
‘Robson Report’, was published in 1994 with measures
based primarily on the results of the 1991 Census.
The Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency
(NISRA) commissioned the Social Disadvantage Research
Centre at the University of Oxford to produce updated
deprivation measures in 2000. The Northern Ireland
Measures of Deprivation 2001 were published in 2001 and
based on data relating to 1999. Unlike previous measures
the Oxford methodology primarily used information from
administrative sources. The 2005 measures of spatial
deprivation were also commissioned by NISRA and
constructed by a team led by Professor Mike Noble at the
University of Oxford. As such these measures of spatial
deprivation are often referred to as the ‘Noble’ measures.
4
In 2009 Government Departments recommended via
Statistics Coordinating Group that the NIMDM 2005 was
updated, with a fuller methodological review of the
measures to follow after publication of the small area
results of the Census 2011.
The scope of the update was broadly limited to a temporal
updating of the indicators used in the 2005 research. As
such, the intention was to revise statistical indicators only
where explicitly recommended in the NIMDM 2005 report,
where indicators were no longer available or where data
had been significantly enhanced. Any fundamental
revisions were not considered as part of the update.
The construction of the 2010 multiple deprivation measures
was carried out ‘in-house’ by NISRA statisticians and
overseen by a Steering Group comprising representatives
from each of the NI Government Departments, NI Housing
Executive, Rural Development Council, NI Council for
Voluntary Action, Society of Local Authority Chief
Executives, and the Equality Commission. A full list of
Steering Group members is available in Annex B.
For more information on National Statistics please see www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk
3
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Consultation
The ‘Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2009:
Consultation Document’1 was published in July 2009
seeking views on the proposals to update the NIMDM
2005. The consultation document was circulated widely
and available for download on the NISRA2 and Northern
Ireland Neighbourhood Information Service (NINIS)3
websites. In total 600 documents were distributed and 550
downloaded.
The consultation responses were considered alongside the
statistical properties of the available data, the remit of the
update to the deprivation measures and the results of an
independent peer review. The proposed content was
presented to the Deprivation Steering Group and
subsequently agreed. ‘The Northern Ireland Multiple
Deprivation Measure 2010: Blueprint Document’4 was
published in February 2010 presenting the main issues
arising during the consultation period and the rationale for
the resulting content of the updated measures.
The associated consultation period ran from 27th July 2009
to 16th November 2009 during which public consultation
events were held in Omagh, Lisburn and Belfast. These
events were attended by over 100 people and 90 verbal
responses were noted. In addition 40 written responses to
the consultation were received.
1
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2009: Consultation Document, July 2009
www.nisra.gov.uk/deprivation/archive/Updateof2005Measures/NIMDM_2009_Consultation_Document.pdf
2
Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency website
www.nisra.gov.uk
3
Northern Ireland Neighbourhood Information Service website
www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk
4
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010: Blueprint Document, February 2010
http://www.nisra.gov.uk/deprivation/archive/Updateof2005Measures/NIMDM_2010_Blueprint_Document.pdf
4
Chapter 2: Northern Ireland
Multiple Deprivation Measure
2010
Introduction to Domains
The NIMDM 2010 is a combination of all seven deprivation
domains, weighted as follows:
The Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure
(NIMDM) 2010 comprises seven domains of deprivation,
each developed to measure a distinct form or type of
deprivation; income, employment, health, education,
proximity to services, living environment and crime.
Although the term deprivation is often synonymous with
monetary poverty it is important to note that only the
Income Deprivation Domain is intended to measure poverty
in this sense. The remaining six domains focus on other
types of deprivation, such as the lack of adequate
education or poor health. The domains can be interpreted
individually or combined to assess deprivation in more than
one domain.
■
Income Deprivation 25%
■
Employment Deprivation 25%
■
Health Deprivation and Disability 15%
■
Education Skills and Training Deprivation 15%
■
Proximity to Services 10%
■
Living Environment 5%
■
Crime and Disorder 5%
The weights attributed to each of the domains are as per
the NIMDM 2005 and were determined by the robustness
of indicator data, user consultation and considerations of
theory on models of multiple deprivation. For a full
discussion please see page 29, Northern Ireland Multiple
Deprivation Measure 2005: May 2005.5
Composition of Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Living Env
5%
Proximity
10%
Crime/Dis
5%
Income
25%
Education
15%
Employment
25%
Health
15%
5
http://www.nisra.gov.uk/deprivation/archive/NIMDM2005FullReport.pdf
5
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Introduction to Indicators
The deprivation domains are constructed from indicators,
grouped according to the type of deprivation they measure.
In total 52 indicators were included in the overall multiple
deprivation measure, chosen after considering the remit of
the update, the consultation responses and the results of
an independent peer review. The statistical properties of
available data were also examined to ensure their accuracy
in measuring deprivation.
Each indicator chosen was specific to one of the seven
domains of deprivation; Income Deprivation, Employment
Deprivation, Health Deprivation and Disability, Education
Skills and Training Deprivation, Proximity to Services, Living
Environment and Crime and Disorder. For example, fuel
poverty, although suggested in the consultation, was not
used as an indicator of deprivation within the current
domain methodology as it results from an interaction
between housing quality and low income. However, both of
these concepts are captured separately in the Living
Environment and Income Deprivation domains.
Within domains indicators were chosen that represented
major features of that form of deprivation rather than
deprivation affecting a small number of people or areas in
Northern Ireland. This allowed the degree of deprivation to
be identified as opposed to a simple ‘present/not present’
approach.
In order to provide a relative deprivation measure and to
allow meaningful area based comparisons indicator data
included were available for all of Northern Ireland and
collected in a consistent form. Where any bias was
identified the indicator was omitted or corrected for this
effect (for example see discussion in Health Deprivation
and Disability Domain on the correction of the potential
rural bias in the use of an emergency admissions indicator).
6
Indicators within each domain were direct measures or
good proxies of that form of deprivation. The majority of
indicator data were sourced from administrative systems
rather than surveys specifically designed to collect
information on deprivation. The main advantage of using
administrative data was that it allowed the calculation of
detailed small area measures whilst sample surveys
generally would not. The main disadvantage to note is that
the administrative systems are not designed to collect
information on deprivation per se. Although the data from
administrative systems are not always direct measures of
deprivation, they are excellent proxies, and have the benefit
that they allow the calculation of detailed small area
statistics.
As the aim of the deprivation measures is to identify small
area concentrations of deprivation it is important that
indicators were statistically robust at the small area level.
Where cases or incidences were low, longer time trends
were included to ensure indicators were not dominated by
one-off or uncharacteristic events.
Finally statistical indicators were as up to date as possible
to provide information on current deprivation; the majority
of data relate to the time period 2007-2009.
Output Geography
The main output geography for the NIMDM 2010 is the
Super Output Area (SOA). SOAs were designed for
reporting the results of the NIMDM 2005 and are equivalent
to Electoral Wards and sub-divisions of Electoral Wards in
the majority of cases. In total Northern Ireland is made up
of 890 SOAs with an average population of 2,000 people.
SOAs are the optimal small area geography for reporting
the results of the NIMDM 2010 as they have been designed
to be as similar as possible in population size, unlike
Electoral Wards which range from approximately 700
people in Moyle Local Government District to
approximately 9,500 people in Belfast Local Government
District.
Following consultation responses, Output Area (OA)
measures have also been created. In total Northern Ireland
is made up of 5,022 OAs with an average population of 350
people.
Summary deprivation measures are available for Electoral
Wards, Local Government Districts and Assembly Areas.
7
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Chapter 3: Domains
Income Deprivation Domain
Purpose of the domain
The purpose of the Income Deprivation Domain is to
identify the proportion of the population experiencing
income deprivation at the small area level. This proportion
is calculated by obtaining a non-overlapping count of
individuals living in households in receipt of income related
benefits and tax credits.
Income Deprivation Domain 2010 indicators
Adults and children in Income Support households
(2008/09. Source: DSD)
Adults and children in State Pension Credit households
(2008/09. Source: DSD)
Adults and children in income based Jobseeker’s
Allowance households
(2008/09. Source: DSD)
Adults and children in income based Employment and
Support Allowance households
(2008/09. Source: DSD)
Adults and children in Housing Benefit households
(2008/09. Source: DSD/LPS)
Adults and children in Working Tax Credit households
whose equivalised income (excluding housing benefits) is
below 60% of the NI median before housing costs
(August 2008. Source: HMRC)
Adults and children in Child Tax Credit households whose
equivalised income (excluding housing benefits) is below
60% of the NI median before housing costs
(August 2008. Source: HMRC)
Income Deprivation affecting Children measure
A stand-alone measure combining the percentage of an
SOA’s children aged under 16 living in families in receipt of
Income Support, State Pension Credit, income based
Jobseeker’s Allowance, income based Employment and
Support Allowance, Housing Benefit, Working Tax Credit or
Child Tax Credit. Tax credit claimants are included only
where the equivalised income is below 60% of the NI
median before housing costs.
8
Income Deprivation affecting Older People measure
A stand-alone measure combining the percentage of an
SOA’s population aged 60 or over and their partners (if 60
and over), living in households in receipt of Income
Support, State Pension Credit, income based Jobseeker’s
Allowance, income based Employment and Support
Allowance, Housing Benefit, Working Tax Credit or Child
Tax Credit. Tax credit claimants are included only where the
equivalised income is below 60% of the NI median before
housing costs.
Changes from NIMDM 2005
There have been a number of changes to the construction
of the Income Deprivation Domain as a result of changes in
the benefit system and access to data.
Since the creation of the NIMDM 2005 the criteria for
claiming Income Support have changed and two additional
income related benefits have been created: State Pension
Credit and Employment and Support Allowance. State
Pension Credits were introduced in 2003, replacing the
Minimum Income Guarantee element of Income Support
for those over 60 whose income was below a minimum
standard, while in 2008 Employment and Support
Allowance was launched for new Income Support
customers claiming due to an illness or disability. To
capture those previously covered by a single Income
Support indicator it was necessary to include in the
updated domain indicators relating to Income Support,
State Pension Credit and the income component of
Employment and Support Allowance.
The NIMDM 2005 Income Deprivation Domain included
those living in households in receipt of Working Families
Tax Credit and Disabled Person’s Tax Credit whose income
was below 60% of the UK median income. These Tax
Credits have since been replaced by Working Tax Credit
and Child Tax Credit.
In addition to the amendments necessary due to changes
in the administration of benefits and tax credits, a housing
benefit indicator has been included in the Income
Deprivation Domain. The housing benefit indicator includes
those in social rented houses, privately rented houses and
owner occupiers in receipt of rate relief or rate rebate. The
inclusion of the housing benefit indicator in this form gained
broad support in the consultation.
Issues
Two issues concerning the measurement of income
deprivation arose during the consultation; the variation in
benefit uptake and the potential for the use of a modelled
income estimate; and the time period of the domain given
the effects of the recession.
Variation in Benefit Uptake
Concerns were raised during the consultation process that
differences in benefit uptake may exist across Northern
Ireland, such that some groups were more likely to be
entitled to, but not receiving, benefits (entitled nonrecipients) than others. This was raised in relation to
perceived differences in benefit uptake by community
background, by pensioners and by ‘migrants’.
Although the case of variation in benefit uptake by
community background was noted in consultation
responses, there is no research that provides backing for
this theory. As detailed in the consultation document the
Northern Ireland Family Resource Survey is currently the
only comprehensive data source which can be used to
accurately model entitlement to benefits in Northern
Ireland. The number of entitled non-recipients assessed
from the survey however is low. As such benefit uptake
cannot be modelled robustly using this source.
Similarly it was noted that income deprived economic
migrants may not be included in the measures due to
restrictions on claiming benefits.
It is likely that the consultation responses referring to
‘migrants’ related to those coming to live and work in
Northern Ireland from one of the eight Central and Eastern
European accession countries (Czech Republic, Estonia,
Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia)
following European Union expansion in 2004; the majority
of whom are likely to be registered on the Worker
Registration Scheme (WRS)6,7. Those on the WRS are
eligible for Housing Benefit and after 12 months of
continuous employment are eligible for the same benefits
as UK citizens.8 The inclusion of a Housing Benefit
indicator in the domain will therefore capture those income
deprived economic migrants who have resided in Northern
Ireland for less than a year. Income deprived economic
migrants residing in Northern Ireland for 12 months or more
will be counted through the remaining Income Deprivation
domain benefits.
Consultation responses also highlighted the perception that
using benefit data to measure income deprived older
people would result in an undercount due to low levels of
benefit uptake. Again, it is difficult to know the extent of the
problem as measuring those that are entitled to but not
claiming benefits is difficult as described above and as
recognised in the Department for Social Development
(DSD)’s recent consultation.9 DSD however have many
programmes to promote the uptake of benefits by those
that are entitled. Such programmes include local
promotional activity, publication of leaflets and the
provision of assistance and advice in Social Security
Agencies; all of which should help to minimise the number
of entitled non-recipients and consequently the potential
for undercount in the Income Deprivation Domain.
In a small number of responses the use of modelled
income estimates was supported as an alternative to a
benefit-based Income Deprivation Domain due to the
perception of differing benefit uptake rates.
6
Long-term International Migration Estimates for Northern Ireland (2004-05) - Sources and Methodology, page 7
http://www.nisra.gov.uk/archive/demography/population/migration/NI_Migration_Report(2005).pdf
7
For more information on the Worker Registration Scheme see UK Border Agency website
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/workingintheuk/eea/wrs/
8
For more information regarding benefits for non-UK nationals please see http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/index/money-tax-and-benefits/benefits-and-financialsupport/beginners-guide-to-benefits/benefits-for-non-uk-nationals.htm
9
The Department for Social Development commenced a public consultation on the 3rd of September 2009 on plans to withdraw the annual National Statistic on
estimates of benefit uptake for Northern Ireland. The results of the consultation are currently under consideration.
9
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
The creation of small area income estimates was
commissioned by NISRA and produced by the University of
Essex following recommendations in the 2005 NIMDM
report. To calculate the small area income estimates the
Family Resource Survey in 2003/04 and 2004/05 was
modelled to the small area level using population
characteristics as reported in the 2001 Census.
The peer review team were asked to consider the merits of
using a modelled Income Deprivation Domain as opposed
to the proposed benefit-based domain. Noting that the
report by the University of Essex recognised that any
modelling approach which used Census as an important
constituent data source will become less reliable as time
increases from the Census date, the peer review team
recommended that the Income Deprivation Domain should
continue to be based on benefit data.
Recession
Clarification was also sought on the time period to which
the Income Deprivation Domain data will relate, given that
the economic downturn impacted on different parts of
Northern Ireland at different stages. It was advised by the
Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to use the
most up to date data, to more accurately reflect the
impacts of the recession. Balancing the need for the most
up to date statistics given the impact of the recession, and
the date to which small area population estimates relate,
the Income Deprivation Domain indicator data will cover
the period April 2008 to March 2009.
10
Method of Combination
The seven income data sources were combined and
duplicates removed to create a non-overlapping count of
people receiving income related benefits/credits.
The Income Deprivation Domain counts all adults and
children in income deprived households. The Income
Deprivation Affecting Children (IDAC) measure includes
only children under 16 years of age living in income
deprived households, while the Income Deprivation
Affecting Older People (IDAOP) counts those aged 60 and
over living in income deprived households.
Interpretation
Each of the three measures (Income Deprivation, Income
Deprivation Affecting Children and Income Deprivation
Affecting Older People) are expressed as a rate of the
relevant population. The Income Deprivation Domain score
can therefore be interpreted as the percentage of people in
the area that are income deprived. The IDAC reflects the
percentage of children in the area that are income deprived
and the IDAOP the percentage of older people in the area
that are income deprived.
Ranks are provided for all three measures of income
deprivation at SOA level. In each case the SOA ranked 1 is
the most deprived while the SOA ranked 890 is the least
deprived.
Employment Deprivation
Domain
Purpose of the Domain
This domain measures employment deprivation defined as
involuntary exclusion of the working age population from
work.
Employment Deprivation Domain 2010
Unemployment claimant count of women aged 18-59 and
men aged 18-64
(2008/09. Source: DSD)
Incapacity Benefit claimants women aged 18-59 and men
aged 18-64
(2008/09. Source: DSD)
Severe Disablement Allowance claimants women aged 1859 and men aged 18-64
(2008/09. Source: DSD)
Carer’s Allowance claimants women aged 18-59 and men
aged 18-64
(2008/09. Source: DSD)
Employment and Support Allowance claimants women
aged 18-59 and men aged 18-64
(2008/09. Source: DSD)
Steps to Work or New Deal Participants women aged 1859 and men aged 18-64
(October 2008 – March 2009. Source: DEL)
Changes from the NIMDM 2005
There are a number of differences between the
construction of the Employment Domain in 2005 and 2010
as a result of changes to the administration of benefits and
government employment programmes.
In September 2008 Steps to Work, the Department for
Employment and Learning (DEL)‘s new flexible approach to
helping people to find work, was introduced in Northern
Ireland. The Steps to Work programme subsumes the main
New Deal programme which was included in the NIMDM
2005 to capture those not claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance
but who were actively seeking employment. The Steps to
Work indicator therefore replaces the New Deal indicator.
Employment and Support Allowance was introduced in
2008 for new Incapacity Benefit claimants: a benefit
specific to those that cannot work due to illness or
disability. Those who were already claiming Incapacity
Benefit continue to claim this benefit while new eligible
claimants receive Employment and Support Allowance.
Therefore Incapacity Benefit and Employment and Support
Allowance were both included in the Employment
Deprivation Domain.
Issues
Concerns raised during the consultation centred on two
main issues; the lack of a specific measure of hidden
unemployment and the potential for variation in benefit
uptake, particularly regarding economic migrants. The latter
issue has been dealt with in the Income Deprivation
Domain section.
Hidden Unemployment
In general hidden unemployment refers to people who are
not actively seeking employment but who would like to
work. This type of unemployment is often ‘hidden’ in
unemployment statistics as the unemployed are defined as
not working but available to work.
The Employment Deprivation Domain comprises a range of
benefit data to capture the number of working age adults at
the small area who would like to work but are unable to.
Those who are available to work are recorded via the
Jobseeker’s Allowance indicator while those who cannot
work due to an illness or disability are counted through the
Incapacity Benefit, Severe Disablement Allowance or
Employment and Support Allowance measures. After
consultation in 2004 an indicator relating to carers was also
included in the NIMDM 2005 as it was argued that carers
were not voluntarily out of the labour market.
The inclusion of Incapacity Benefit, Severe Disablement
Allowance, Employment and Support Allowance, and
Carer’s Allowance recipients in the Employment Deprivation
Domain goes some way to include people who are classed
as the ‘hidden unemployed’ rather than focussing purely on
active job seekers. There are however others who are not
eligible for the above benefits who would like to work but
are unavailable for work. Mothers who are not working due
to high child care costs are an often cited example.
11
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
The NIMDM 2005 report recommended further research to
ascertain whether the Labour Force Survey and the Family
Resource Survey could be used to create a measure of the
hidden unemployed. Due to the nature of sample surveys
and the small number of people who are likely to be
identified in this category, results could not be modelled
robustly to the small area level.
Method of Combination
The data sources were combined and duplicates removed
to create a non-overlapping count of people receiving
employment related benefits. The non-overlapping count is
expressed as a rate of the working age population (females
aged 18-59 years and males aged 18-64 years).
Concerns were expressed in the consultation responses
that such a measure could not be included. It should be
noted however that the current Employment Deprivation
Domain contains indicators beyond those normally
included in unemployment related measures with the aim of
including those that may be described as the hidden
unemployed.
Interpretation
The resulting score for the Employment Deprivation
Domain can be interpreted as the percentage of working
age people in the area that are employment deprived.
12
Each of the SOAs is also ranked based on the Employment
Deprivation Score, giving a relative measure of employment
deprivation. The SOA ranked 1 is the most deprived while
the SOA ranked 890 is the least deprived.
Health Deprivation and
Disability Domain
Purpose of the Domain
The Health Deprivation and Disability Domain identifies
areas with relatively high rates of premature deaths and
areas where relatively high proportions of the population’s
quality of life is impaired by poor health or who are
disabled.
Health Deprivation and Disability Domain 2010
Potential Years of Life Lost
(2004 to 2008. Source: GRO)
Comparative Illness and Disability Ratio
(Age and gender standardised ratio derived from a nonoverlapping count of Income Support claimants in receipt
of disability premium, State Pension Credit claimants in
receipt of severe disability premium, and claimants of
Attendance Allowance, Severe Disablement Allowance,
Disability Living Allowance, Incapacity Benefit and
Employment and Support Allowance.
2008/09. Source: DSD)
A combined mental health measure of three indicators:
i) Individuals suffering from mood and anxiety disorders,
based on prescribing data (2008/09. Source: BSO)
ii) Suicides (1999 to 2008. Source: GRO)
iii) Mental health inpatient stays (2003/04 to 2007/08.
Source: DHSSPS)
People registered as having cancer (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers)
(2003 to 2007. Source: Northern Ireland Cancer Registry)
Hospital Emergency Admission Rate
(2007/08. Source: DHSSPS)
Low Birth Weight
(2004 to 2008. Source: Child Health System)
Children’s Dental Extractions
(2006/07 to 2007/08. Source: BSO and DHSSPS)
Changes from NIMDM 2005
The Health Deprivation and Disability Domain 2010
includes a number of changes to the 2005 domain. As
recommended in the 2005 deprivation report indicators
relating to children’s health have been included; Low Birth
Weight and Children’s Dental Health; as well as including
information on emergency admissions to hospital and
mental health inpatient stays.
Issues
A number of consultation responses expressed concern at
the inclusion of an Emergency Admissions indicator.
Specifically the concern was that an indicator based on
hospital admissions would contain a rural bias, such that
for a given level of health need there would be fewer
emergency admissions from rural areas than from urban
areas due to the relative ease of access to Accident and
Emergency Units in urban areas.
Statisticians in the Department of Health, Social Services
and Public Safety (DHSSPS) have carried out significant
research into this hypothesis. Their findings show that there
is a small negative correlation between spatial rural-related
variables (e.g. population density) and emergency
admission rates. Modelling standardised emergency
admission rates whilst controlling for health need showed
that although there was no discriminatory rural effect, there
was a small but significant distance to Accident and
Emergency hospital effect. As the effect disappeared
completely when admissions with a length of stay of three
or fewer nights were removed, it was advised that only
emergency admissions of four nights or more were
included in the indicator. The indicator included in the
NIMDM 2010 Health Deprivation and Disability Domain
therefore considers only admissions resulting in a stay of
four or more nights.
Similar access issues were raised when the inclusion of a
mental health inpatient stays indicator was proposed.
Information on mental health inpatient stays was suggested
as a component of the mental health indicator which
previously comprised a measure of people receiving
prescriptions for mood and anxiety disorders, and the
suicide rate.
13
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Mental health indicators were first included in the NIMDM
2001 after consultation showed that it was viewed as an
important aspect of health deprivation, particularly as it
may capture some of the long-term psychological costs of
the Troubles.10 The consultation in 2009 also showed
support for measures of mental health.
Both of the above should help to minimise the variation in
prescription habits between GPs, and so the error
associated with this measure. The combination of this
measure with prescription data and suicide rates should
further improve the measurement of mental health.
It is recognised however that the measurement of mental
health deprivation is not without its difficulties. Concerns
were raised that prescription habits may vary between GPs,
that admissions to a mental health unit would be driven in
part by access, and that using three measures could lead
to a double or triple count of those with mental health
problems.
Method of combination
The domain will comprise seven indicators, each relating to
a different type of health deprivation or disability, for
example premature death or children’s health. The aim of
the domain is not to create a count of health deprived or
disabled people, as in the income and employment
domain, as clearly it is possible that one person may be
admitted to hospital in an emergency as well having a
separate non-related disability. Instead the analysis
supposes that there is an underlying factor to which each
of the imperfect measures is related. Factor analysis is
therefore used to determine the weights for each of the
indicators in the Health Deprivation and Disability Domain.
Further detail on factor analysis is provided in the Technical
Annex.
The proposed indicator comprises three sources of
information on mental health deprivation. The intention is
not to create a count of the number of people who suffer
from mood and anxiety disorders by simply summing
these, but to use several sources of information that are all
thought to occur as a result of one underlying factor –
mental health deprivation.
Each of the three sources is likely to measure mental health
deprivation with some error. Although it is difficult to know
the degree to which, for example, accessibility issues play
a part in determining who is admitted to a mental health
unit and so how large or small the error is, it is assumed
that the errors associated with each of the three data
sources are not correlated and therefore a combined
measure would create a stronger indicator than one source.
The three mental health measures were also combined
using factor analysis to form a single indicator. All
indicators were then ranked and their ranks transformed to
a standard normal distribution. The transformed ranks were
combined with weights determined by factor analysis. The
resulting scores are ranked to form the Health Deprivation
and Disability Rank.
Similarly, there may be errors associated with using
prescription data as a proxy for a measurement of those
suffering from mood and anxiety disorders. The error in this
measure associated with the differences in prescribing
habits are likely to be small as two monitoring systems are
currently in place to examine prescribing behaviours. Firstly
Health and Social Care Board prescribing advisors regularly
monitor prescribing activity of practitioners and visit GP
Practices to discuss good practice in this area; and
secondly the COMPASS service which a) provides quarterly
reports to each practice benchmarking it within its peer
group and b) provides professional advice to practitioners
about effective prescribing.
Interpretation
The Health Deprivation and Disability score results from the
combination of the transformed indicator ranks described
above and in more detail in the Technical Annex. Unlike the
Income and Employment Deprivation Domains the score
has no obvious meaningful interpretation. It is not possible
to interpret the score as an absolute measure of Health
Deprivation and Disability or to determine the percentage of
people experiencing this form of deprivation.
10
The Health Deprivation and Disability Rank provides a
relative measure of this form of deprivation. The SOA
ranked 1 is the most deprived while the SOA ranked 890 is
the least deprived.
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2005, May 2005, Section 4, page 13
http://www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk/mapxtreme_deprivation2005/viewData/Deprivation2005Report.pdf
14
Education, Skills and
Training Deprivation Domain
Purpose of the domain
The purpose of the domain is to measure the extent of
deprivation in education, skills and training at the small area
level for both children and working age adults.
Sub-Domain: Working Age Adults
Proportions of working age adults (25-59) with no or low
levels of qualification
(2001 Census. Source: NISRA)
Proportions of pupils attending Special Educational Needs
Schools or attending primary school with Special
Educational Needs Stages 3-5
(2006/07 to 2007/08. Source: School Census, DE)
Changes from the NIMDM 2005
Following the recommendations in the NIMDM 2005 report
and support during the consultation process the Education,
Skills and Training Domain 2010 has developed to include
measures relating to children of primary school age. As
such, three additional indicators have been included:
primary school absenteeism rates, primary level special
educational needs (SEN) and KS2 performance, which are
grouped together to form the Primary School Sub-Domain.
The school leavers indicator which considers the
destinations of those leaving school has also been
expanded to include those not entering employment,
education or training, rather than not entering education
which was the focus of the 2005 indicator.
Absenteeism at primary schools (all absences)
(2006/07 to 2007/08. Source: DE)
Three main issues arose concerning the Education, Skills
and Training Domain proposals.
Education Skills and Training Deprivation Domain 2010
Sub–Domain: Primary School
Key Stage 2 Teacher Assessments for English and Maths
(and Irish in Irish medium schools/units)
(2006/07 to 2007/08. Source: DE)
Sub–Domain: Post-Primary School
Key Stage 3 Teacher Assessments for English and Maths
(and Irish in Irish medium schools/units)
(2006/07 to 2007/08. Source: DE)
GCSE or equivalent qualifications points score
(2005/06 to 2007/08. Source: School Leavers Survey, DE)
Proportions of those leaving school aged 16, 17 and 18
and not entering Further Education, Employment or
Training
(2003/04 to 2007/08. Source: School Leavers Survey, DE)
Proportions of 18-21 year olds who have not enrolled in
Higher Education Courses at Higher Education or Further
Education establishments
(2004/05 to 2007/08. Source: HESA and FESR, DEL)
Proportions of pupils attending Special Educational Needs
Schools or attending post-primary school with Special
Educational Needs Stages 3-5
(2006/07 to 2007/08. Source: School Census, DE)
Comparability of Special Educational Needs
Assessments
A number of consultation responses expressed concern
that special educational needs scores were not
applied/awarded consistently across Northern Ireland. If
this is the case the measures would include a bias and so
would not be an appropriate indicator of real educational
need or education deprivation.
Special Educational Needs (SEN) stages range from 1 to 5
(in increasing order of severity) and on advice from
statisticians in the Department of Education it has been
decided to include only pupils at stages 3 - 5 on the SEN
Code of Practice in the primary and post-primary SEN
indicators. Pupils at those stages have been subject to
formal assessment of their needs by specialists from the
Education and Library Boards or other statutory providers.
Including those at stages 3-5 measures those pupils with
the highest level of special educational needs and
minimises the potential for inconsistencies across schools
and areas.
Absenteeism at post-primary schools (all absences)
(2006/07 to 2007/08. Source: DE)
15
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Comparability of Absenteeism Rates
Similarly some concern was raised about the recording of
absenteeism sessions across schools with a view that
schools differed in their criteria for assigning an absence as
‘authorised’ or ‘unauthorised’. In keeping with the NIMDM
2005 and the Department of Education’s reporting of
absence statistics11 both authorised and unauthorised
sessions were used in the primary and post-primary
absenteeism indicators.
Comparability of Key Stage 2 Assessments
The proposal to replace ‘the proportions of children aged
11 and 12 not attending grammar school’ indicator
included in NIMDM 2005 with Key Stage 2 Teacher
Assessments gained broad support. One response
however questioned the degree to which assessments
were monitored across primary schools.
The specific indicator measured is the proportion of pupils
attaining the expected level in English, Maths and Irish (in
Irish medium schools) at Key Stage 2. This indicator is also
included as one of the Department of Education’s Public
Service Agreement targets and is endorsed with the
Department as the most reliable measure of primary level
performance across Northern Ireland.
Other concerns
Responses also pointed to the lack of a measure relating
specifically to ‘migrant’ children, such as the number of
children with English as an additional language.
The Education, Skills and Training Deprivation Domain aims
to measure deprivation through educational outcomes,
such as attainment at Key Stage 2, Key Stage 3 and GCSE
level. Having English as an additional language does not
lead to poor educational attainment per se and so a
measure of the number of children with English as an
additional language is not included. This is not to say that
children with English as an additional language will be
excluded from the domain. Children who have English as
an additional language who are also deprived in terms of
education will be captured in the domain through low
attainment in the assessments listed above.
11
Similarly the lack of a ‘Free School Meals’ indicator was
questioned. A child’s entitlement to free school meals is
determined by their household income through their
parents’ or guardians’ eligibility for income related benefits.
Children living in income deprived households will be
included in the income deprivation domain which is
intended solely to measure this form of deprivation.
Children who receive free school meals and perform poorly
at school will be included in the domain via the outcome
indicators.
Method of Combination
Indicators in the Primary and Post-Primary Sub-Domains
were ranked, transformed to a normal distribution and
combined using weights determined by factor analysis. The
Working Age Adults Sub-Domain is expressed as a rate of
the 25-59 year old population.
The three Sub-Domain scores are ranked, transformed to
an exponential distribution and combined with equal
weights to form the overall Education, Skills and Training
Domain.
Interpretation
The working age adults sub-domain score can be
interpreted as the percentage of working age adults in an
area who have low or no levels of qualifications. The
primary and post-primary sub-domain scores cannot be
interpreted in this way.
Each of the sub-domain scores were ranked to provide
relative measures of education, skills and training
deprivation for the three broad age groups. In each subdomain the SOA ranked 1 is the most deprived, while the
SOA ranked 890 is the least deprived. The Education, Skills
and Training Domain Rank takes all three sub-domains into
account. SOAs are ranked from
most deprived (rank 1) to least deprived (rank 890).
Attendance at grant-aided primary, post-primary and special schools 2007/08: Detailed Statistics
http://www.deni.gov.uk/school_attendance_-_statistical_press_release_200708.pdf
16
Proximity to Services Domain
Purpose of the Domain
The purpose of this domain is to measure the extent to
which people have poor geographical access to key
services, including statutory and general services.
Proximity to Services 2010
Fastest road travel time from to:
■
GP premises (2009, Source: BSO)
■
Accident and Emergency hospital (2009, Source:
DHSSPS)
■
Dentists (2009, Source: BSO)
■
Pharmacists (2009, Source: BSO)
■
Opticians (2009, Source: BSO)
■
Job Centre or Jobs and Benefits Office (2008, Source:
DEL)
■
Post Office (2009, Source: Post Office Ltd)
■
Supermarket / Food Store (2007, Source: Experian)
■
Large Service Centre (Source: DSD)
■
Council Leisure Centre (2009, Source: DCAL)
■
Financial Services (2007, Source: Experian, Credit Union
Register)
■
Other general services (2007, Source: Experian)
Changes from NIMDM 2005
A number of additional indicators have been included in the
2010 Proximity to Services Domain following
recommendations in the NIMDM 2005, improved data
availability and support in the consultation responses. As
well as their inclusion there has been a change in the
calculation of ‘proximity’ from road distance to road travel
time.
Specifically the NIMDM 2010 has been developed to
include council leisure centres, financial services and a
general services indicator. In addition the supermarket
indicator has been broadened to measure all food stores
regardless of number of employees, large service centres
have been determined by service provision rather than
population size and cross border Accident and Emergency
Services and large Service Centres have been included.
Proximity not Access
During consultation, a number of general concerns were
expressed, highlighting the fact that proximity does not
equate to access. These centred on availability of public
transport for those lacking access to a car; the difficulty of
cross-community movement (both physical and
psychological); physical problems of the elderly and
disabled; and high costs associated with using
convenience stores or cross-border services.
It is recognised that these (and other) factors are indeed
likely to impact on the ability and wish of people to access
services that are in relatively close proximity on the basis of
estimated car travel time. Obtaining the data to take
account of the difference between proximity and access
has, however, already proved difficult for some aspects (in
respect of public transport) and it would be massively more
difficult for other matters, for example taking account of
preferred shopping venue for the residents of every small
area in Northern Ireland. Nonetheless, it seems preferable
to produce a basic measure of proximity, basically similar
to previous work, which can serve as a foundation for
improvements as and when the data becomes available.
17
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Food Shops
The proposal for including smaller food shops in the
supermarket / food store indicator met with some
objections on the basis that supermarkets were usually
cheaper and offered a better range of healthy foods. It
should, however, be noted that the previous version of the
measure actually referred to supermarkets with 50 or more
employees, the great majority of which stores are found in
service centres. This means that to a large extent, the
indicator was duplicating another indicator. Furthermore,
large supermarkets are apt to devote a greater proportion
of their floor space to non-food items, compared with the
smaller supermarkets within their own chain. In general,
whilst accepting that cheap food is preferable to expensive
food, expensive food remains preferable to no food. There
is some evidence from England that sales of food in
convenience stores increased during the snowy period of
2009-2010, when access to supermarkets was restricted
by the weather. Accordingly, the proposed extension of the
indicator seems justified.
Cross Border Services
In addition to concerns about the possibility that,
regardless of proximity, services in the Republic of Ireland
may be more difficult to access or of a different quality, it
was also suggested in the consultation responses that the
deprivation measures should be restricted to services
provided by Northern Ireland for Northern Ireland. Given
that cross-border movement is possible and does in fact
occur, it seems inappropriate to ignore services in the
Republic of Ireland where data is available on them i.e.
service centres and Accident and Emergency services.
Travel Time
There was general agreement with the proposed change
from travel distance to travel time as a measure of
proximity, but some concerns were expressed about the
applicability of assumptions concerning achievable speeds
on various kinds of road. These concerns related to impact
of weather, state of road repair and traffic congestion.
Factors such as these, however, impact with equal force on
travel distance itself, since the use of distance is equivalent
to an implicit assumption that all roads allow equal speed.
Monitoring of such matters is likely to prove difficult and
again, it seems preferable to make use of the data that is
available now, until such time as improved data becomes
available.
18
Method of combination
Travel time is determined by the quickest road route
between the location of a service and the location of the
population. The location of a Northern Ireland-based
service is deemed to be at the population-weighted
centroid of the OA where it occurs.
For each OA, a travel time to each of the services is
available. This is adjusted to take account of the average
travel time that would be anticipated, given the number of
locations at which the service is available, thus preventing
less commonly available services from dominating the final
result simply by virtue of the fact that they are less common
and so travel times are greater to reach them (the effect of
clustering of particular services in certain parts of Northern
Ireland is not removed by this technique). An average
overall travel time for all services is calculated, giving
double weight to Accident and Emergency Services to
reflect their perceived importance, in line with previous
analysis.
The SOA results were calculated by taking the weighted
average of travel times to all services for constituent OAs.
Weightings were determined by OA populations.
Interpretation
Indicator data are provided for the Proximity to Services
Domain at Output Area level. Scores can be interpreted as
the average time in minutes to travel to a service from a
given Output Area.
The Proximity to Services Domain rank provides a relative
measure with rank 1 indicating the most deprived SOA and
rank 890 indicating the least deprived SOA.
Living Environment Domain
Purpose of the Domain
The aim of the Living Environment Domain is to identify
small areas experiencing deprivation in terms of the quality
of housing, access to suitable housing, and the outdoor
physical environment. As such the Living Environment
Domain comprises three sub-domains.
Living Environment Domain 2010
Sub-Domain: Housing Quality
SOA level Decent Homes Standard
(2006. Source: NIHE, modelled NI House Conditions
Survey)
SOA level Housing Health and Safety Rating System
(2006. Source: NIHE, modelled NI House Conditions
Survey)
Sub-Domain: Housing Access
Homelessness Acceptances under the homelessness
provisions of the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 1988
and the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 2003
(2005/06 to 2007/08. Source: NIHE)
Sub-Domain: Outdoor Physical Environment
SOA Local Area Problem Score
(2006. Source: NIHE, modelled NIHCS)
Changes from the NIMDM 2005
The Housing Quality Sub-Domain includes two indicators
that were not included in the 2005 Domain; Decent Homes
Standard and Housing Health and Safety Rating System.
The Decent Homes Standard is a measure of the quality of
a house in terms of its state of repair, thermal comfort and
how modern the facilities are. The Housing Health and
Safety System focuses on defects in dwellings that pose a
health and safety risk to occupants. Both indicators are
modelled from the House Conditions Survey and applied to
the Land and Property database which provides
information on type and age of houses in an area.
12
Two indicators from the 2001 Census are no longer
included in the Living Environment Domain: Households
with central heating and household overcrowding.
The majority of consultation responses were in support of
the improvements proposed for the Living Environment
Domain.
Measurement of Overcrowding
In general consultation responses recognised that although
overcrowding is an important issue and form of deprivation,
to use data relating to Census 2001 would be an inaccurate
measure of the current spatial distribution of overcrowding
in Northern Ireland. In particular it was noted that the
significant migration taking place in Northern Ireland
following the accession of eight Central and Eastern
European countries to the EU was likely to have an effect
on which areas experienced overcrowding. Many
respondents however asked that such an indicator was
included in future measures when the small area results of
the 2011 Census become available.
As detailed in the consultation document an alternative
source, the House Conditions Survey which also records
information on overcrowding, was considered. Following
advice from the Northern Ireland Housing Executive (NIHE)
it was decided not to use this information source as only a
small number of migrant houses were likely to be covered
by the survey and so would not be a solution to the
problem described above.
The use of information on ‘Houses in Multiple Occupation’
(HMO) was suggested as an alternative indicator of
overcrowding in the consultation responses. The peer
review team was asked to consider whether the HMOs
recorded by the NIHE could be used as an indicator of
overcrowding, or if there were alternative sources of
information on overcrowding that could be employed.
The peer review team recommended that HMOs were not
included in the Living Environment Domain as it measures a
different phenomenon to overcrowding. Specifically the
definition of an HMO is ‘a house occupied by more than 2
qualifying persons, being persons who are not all members
of the same family’.12 As such the HMO data could include
a student household but exclude a large family living in
overcrowded conditions.
Northern Ireland Housing Executive definition of ‘Houses in Multiple Occupation’ www.nihe.gov.uk/index/yh-home/renting_privately/hmo/definition.htm
19
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
The peer review team recommended further investigation
into the application of overcrowding time trends as shown
in the Continuous Household Survey to the small area
Census data recorded in 2001.
The Continuous Household Survey (CHS) collects
information on overcrowding as defined by the bedroom
standard13 and shows a decrease in the level of
overcrowding in Northern Ireland from 4.1% in 2000-01 to
2.0% in 2008-09. The published results from the Census
2001 include a different measure of overcrowding based on
occupancy ratings14 and show that 7.3% of households
were classed as overcrowded in 2001. Analysis at Health
Board Level showed that the two measures were not
consistent in the relative degree of overcrowding between
Health Boards i.e. Census data recorded the Western
Health Board as having the highest percentage of
overcrowded households and Northern Health Board the
lowest, while the CHS recorded Western Health Board and
Southern Health Board as highest and lowest respectively.
If the two measures differed in definitions of overcrowding
but agreed on the relative differences between areas i.e.
overcrowding was consistently higher in one area than
another, it would be possible to apply the change in
overcrowding from the CHS to the small area results of the
Census. As the results from the two sources differ it would
not be appropriate to apply such a technique.
The peer review team also considered the options if the
CHS and Census proved incompatible. They note that
retaining the Census 2001 indicator has the disadvantage
that it is out of date, and the advantage that is maintains
consistency with the NIMDM 2005. However as the
Housing Health and Safety indicator includes a measure of
overcrowding, and the majority of consultation responses
were in favour of dropping the indicator they conclude that
it may be unnecessary to have a separate overcrowding
indicator.
Other Concerns
Other responses expressed disappointment at the lack of a
road quality indicator as recommended in the 2005 NIMDM
report. As detailed in the consultation document the
Department for Regional Development holds information on
road type, not quality, and thought this would not be an
accurate reflection of deprivation. A road quality indicator
of this type will therefore not be included in the domain. A
number of responses also gave suggestions for the fuller
review of the measures post 2011, including indicators
relating to litter, quality of open space, interface areas and
perception of safety.
Method of Combination
Indicators were ranked and transformed to a normal
distribution. In the Housing Quality Sub-Domain indicators
were combined with equal weights to produce the subdomain score.
The resulting sub-domain scores were ranked and
transformed to an exponential distribution and combined
with equal weights.
Interpretation
Sub-domain ranks can be assessed separately to
determine deprivation in terms of Housing Quality, Housing
Access and Outdoor Physical Environment. The Living
Environment Domain Rank provides a fuller picture of living
environment deprivation.
It is not possible to interpret the sub-domain or domain
scores as absolute measures of Living Environment
deprivation or to determine the percentage of people
experiencing this form of deprivation.
Therefore, following recommendations from the peer review
and in light of the support from the consultation responses,
a measure of overcrowding based on the 2001 Census was
not included in the updated Living Environment Domain.
13
A dwelling will be overcrowded where the number of bedrooms available to the occupiers is less than the number of bedrooms allocated to them in accordance
with a simple formula based on the age and sex of occupants.
14
The overcrowded indicator provides a measure of under-occupancy and overcrowding. For example, a value of -1 implies there is one room too few and that there
is overcrowding in the household. The occupancy rating assumes that every household, including one person households, requires a minimum of two common
rooms (excluding bathrooms).
20
Crime and Disorder Domain
Purpose of the domain
The Crime and Disorder Domain measures the rate of crime
and disorder at the small area level. This includes recorded
crime, deliberate fires and incidents of anti-social
behaviour.
The Crime and Disorder Domain consists of two subdomains; the Crime Sub-Domain and the Disorder
Sub-Domain.
Crime and Disorder Domain 2010
Sub-Domain: Crime
Violence, robbery and public order
(2004/05 to 2008/09. Source PSNI)
Burglary
(2004/05 to 2008/09. Source PSNI)
Vehicle Theft
(2004/05 to 2008/09. Source PSNI)
Criminal Damage
(2004/05 to 2008/09. Source PSNI)
Sub-Domain: Disorder
Deliberate Primary and Secondary Fires
(2004/05 to 2008/09. Source: NIFRS)
Anti-Social Behaviour Incidents
(2006/07 to 2008/09. Source: PSNI)
Changes from the NIMDM 2005
The Crime sub-domain comprises the same indicators as
the 2005 Crime Sub-Domain. As in 2005, the 2010 Disorder
sub-domain contains indicators relating to fires and
community safety/disturbances. The fire indicator has been
broadened to include both primary and secondary fires,
while the disturbances indicator is based on records of
anti-social behaviour incidents.
Three main issues were noted during the consultation.
Reporting Rates
The main concern expressed in the consultation responses
was the reliance on reported crime data from the PSNI in
the Crime Sub-Domain. As there is a perception that
reporting of crime varies by area with deprivation itself
decreasing the likelihood of reporting a crime, a number of
consultation responses expressed disappointment that the
results of the Northern Ireland Crime Survey (NICS) could
not be used in the Crime Sub-Domain.
It is recognised that there is a perception that reporting
rates vary. The most up-to-date research carried out by the
NIO using the NICS 2007/08 however gave inconclusive
results on the relationship between deprivation and
reporting rates. As such, the recorded crime rates for
Violence, Robbery and Public Order, Burglary, Vehicle Theft
and Criminal Damage will be included in the Crime SubDomain without adjustment.
Secondary Fires
The lack of an indicator relating to ‘Secondary Fires’ was
also queried during the consultation period. The original
proposal was to include only ‘Primary Fires’; broadly
defined as involving buildings and structures, and other
property such as vehicles, storage, plant and machinery;
fires involving casualties, rescues or escapes; and fires
where significant fire and rescue service resources are
employed. Secondary fires do not involve casualties,
rescues or escapes and include fires in derelict buildings
and refuse containers, but also result in action from the Fire
and Rescue Service.
Subsequent discussions with the Northern Ireland Fire and
Rescue Service (NIFRS) gave support for the inclusion of
secondary fire data, as the majority of fires occurring in
Northern Ireland are classed as ‘secondary’. Although the
definition of fires differs for NIFRS reporting purposes, a fire
in a neighbourhood regardless of its classification is likely
to represent some degree of disorder. As such, both
primary and secondary fires are included in the Deliberate
Fires indicator.
Hate Crimes
Other consultation responses suggested the inclusion of a
hate crime indicator. Although a separate indicator is not
included, it is worth noting that any crimes motivated by
‘hate’ resulting in violence or criminal damage, for example,
will be captured in the Crime Sub-Domain through the
listed recorded crime indicators.
21
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Method of Combination
Within the Crime Sub-Domain each of the indicators will be
converted to rates of the at risk population before ranking
and standardising to a normal distribution. The
standardised values will be added with equal weights,
resulting in the Crime Sub-Domain score.
Similarly the two indicators in the Disorder Sub-Domain will
be converted to rates, ranked and transformed to a normal
distribution. The two indicators will be combined with a
60% weight for Anti-Social Behaviour Incidents and a 40%
weight for Deliberate Primary and Secondary Fires as in the
NIMDM 2005. The resulting value is the Disorder SubDomain score.
The Crime and Disorder sub-domain scores will be ranked
and transformed to an exponential distribution. The values
for each sub-domain will be combined in a 60:40 ratio for
crime and disorder respectively resulting in the Crime and
Disorder Domain Score.
22
Interpretation
Sub-domain ranks can be assessed separately to
determine deprivation in terms of Crime and Disorder
individually. The Crime and Disorder Domain Rank provides
a fuller picture of Crime and Disorder deprivation.
It is not possible to interpret the sub-domain or domain
scores as absolute measures of Crime and Disorder
deprivation or to determine the percentage of people
experiencing this form of deprivation.
Northern Ireland Multiple
Deprivation Measure 2010
The seven domains of deprivation can be interpreted as
separate dimensions or types of deprivation as described
above. The domains can also be combined to form a
multiple deprivation measure which takes account of all
domains of deprivation.
The resulting combined score is ranked to give the Multiple
Deprivation Measure Rank. As with the individual domains,
rank 1 indicates the most deprived Super Output Area
while rank 890 denotes the least deprived Super Output
Area.
The Multiple Deprivation Measure is a weighted
combination of the seven domains of deprivation. To
combine the domains, the domain ranks are firstly
transformed to an exponential distribution (ranging from 0
to 100) and combined with the following weights:
■
Income Deprivation 25%
■
Employment Deprivation 25%
■
Health Deprivation and Disability 15%
■
Education Skills and Training Deprivation 15%
■
Proximity to Services 10%
■
Living Environment 5%
■
Crime and Disorder 5%
23
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Chapter 4: Results
Ten measures are presented at the Super Output Area
(SOA) level in the following section: The Multiple
Deprivation Measure, seven domains of deprivation and
two supplementary income measures for older people and
children. An overview of the distribution of the multiple
deprivation measure is discussed with reference to the
Local Government Districts (LGDs) and NUTS 3 areas;
Belfast, Outer Belfast, East of Northern Ireland, North of
Northern Ireland and, West & South of Northern Ireland.
The most deprived rural areas are highlighted in a brief
section.
The Multiple Deprivation Measure is also presented at the
Output Area (OA) level. This measure was created using
OA indicators where possible. Where OA level indicators
were not robust or available, SOA results were applied to
constituent OAs. For more details on the construction of
the OA measures please see Technical Annex section:
Creating Output Area Measures.
A number of summary measures are presented at the LGD
and Assembly Area geographies.
24
NIMDM 2010 Super Output
Area Results
Map 4.1 shows the distribution of deprivation in Northern
Ireland as per the NIMDM 2010. The results are presented
at SOA level and by deprivation decile. The scale runs from
dark blue to light blue with the most deprived decile (most
deprived 10% of SOAs) dark blue and the least deprived
decile (least deprived 10% of SOAs) light blue.
The map shows that the majority of the most deprived
areas in Northern Ireland are in Belfast and Derry, with
some notable pockets in Lisburn, Craigavon and Strabane
LGDs. A small cluster is also evident in Coleraine. The
majority of areas in the least deprived decile are in the east
of Northern Ireland.
15
Table 4.1 presents the 100 most deprived SOAs. A full list
of SOAs and their deprivation ranks are available on the
NISRA deprivation website15 and on the CD attached to
hard copies of the publication. From the table it can be
seen that 15 of the 26 LGDs have at least one SOA in the
most deprived 100 SOAs in Northern Ireland. Over three
quarters of the most deprived 100 SOAs are in Belfast (54),
Derry (16) and Lisburn (8) LGDs. Craigavon (5), Newry &
Mourne (3), Strabane (3), Limavady (2), and Newtownabbey
(2) LGDs have more than one SOA in the most deprived
100 SOAs, while one SOA from Ballymena, Carrickfergus,
Coleraine, Down, Dungannon, Fermanagh and Omagh
LGDs feature in the 100 most deprived SOAs in Northern
Ireland.
Antrim, Ards, Armagh, Ballymoney, Banbridge,
Castlereagh, Cookstown, Larne, Magherafelt, Moyle and
North Down LGDs did not contain SOAs that were ranked
in the top 100 most deprived SOAs in Northern Ireland.
NISRA deprivation website
www.nisra.gov.uk/deprivation.htm
25
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Map 4.1 Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 (SOAs)
26
Table 4.1 Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 Super Output Area results, ranks 1-100
Rank Super Output Area
LGD
Rank Super Output Area
LGD
Rank Super Output Area
LGD
1
Whiterock_2
Belfast
34
Drumgask_2
Craigavon
67
The Mount_2
Belfast
2
Whiterock_3
Belfast
35
Crevagh_2
Derry
68
Glencairn_1
Belfast
3
Falls_2
Belfast
36
Highfield_3
Belfast
69
Blackstaff_2
Belfast
4
Falls_3
Belfast
37
Creggan South
Derry
70
Legoniel_1
Belfast
5
New Lodge_1
Belfast
38
Collin Glen_2
Lisburn
71
Drumgullion_1
Newry & Mourne
6
Shankill_2
Belfast
39
Culmore_2
Derry
72
Poleglass_1
Lisburn
7
Crumlin_2
Belfast
40
Greystone
Limavady
73
Water Works_3
Belfast
8
Falls_1
Belfast
41
Water Works_2
Belfast
74
Glencolin_3
Belfast
9
Ardoyne_3
Belfast
42
Ardoyne_2
Belfast
75
Ballymacarrett_1
Belfast
10
Creggan Central_1
Derry
43
Ardoyne_1
Belfast
76
Ladybrook_3
Belfast
11
Upper Springfield_3
Belfast
44
Brandywell
Derry
77
Dunanney
Newtownabbey
12
East
Strabane
45
Shantallow East
Derry
78
Shaftesbury_1
Belfast
13
Clonard_1
Belfast
46
Westland
Derry
79
Botanic_5
Belfast
14
New Lodge_2
Belfast
47
Glencolin_4
Belfast
80
Lisanelly_2
Omagh
15
New Lodge_3
Belfast
48
Kilwee_2
Lisburn
81
Cliftonville_1
Belfast
16
Collin Glen_3
Lisburn
49
Creggan Central_2
Derry
82
Coalisland South
Dungannon
17
Twinbrook_2
Lisburn
50
Ballymacarrett_2
Belfast
83
Devenish
Fermanagh
18
Shankill_1
Belfast
51
The Mount_1
Belfast
84
Carn Hill_2
Derry
19
Duncairn_1
Belfast
52
Shaftesbury_3
Belfast
85
Old Warren
Lisburn
20
Upper Springfield_1
Belfast
53
Duncairn_2
Belfast
86
Ebrington_2
Derry
21
Water Works_1
Belfast
54
Shaftesbury_2
Belfast
87
Glen Road_2
Belfast
22
Crumlin_1_Belfast
Belfast
55
Drumgor_2
Craigavon
88
Altnagelvin_1
Derry
23
Ballymacarrett_3
Belfast
56
Beechmount_2
Belfast
89
Cliftonville_3
Belfast
24
Whiterock_1
Belfast
57
Woodvale_1
Belfast
90
Island_1
Belfast
25
Shantallow West_2
Derry
58
Clondermot_1
Derry
91
Ballybot
Newry & Mourne
26
The Diamond
Derry
59
Ballymote
Down
92
Woodville_1
Craigavon
27
Woodvale_3
Belfast
60
Upper Springfield_2
Belfast
93
Northland
Carrickfergus
28
Strand_1_Derry
Derry
61
Ballycolman
Strabane
94
Ballee
Ballymena
29
Shantallow West_1
Derry
62
Glencolin_2
Belfast
95
Daisy hill_1
Newry & Mourne
30
Clonard_2
Belfast
63
Woodstock_2
Belfast
96
Chichester Park_1
Belfast
31
Drumnamoe_1
Craigavon
64
Ballysally_1
Coleraine
97
Castlederg
Strabane
32
Twinbrook_1
Lisburn
65
Coolessan
Limavady
98
Upper Malone_2
Belfast
33
Collin Glen_1
Lisburn
66
Woodvale_2
Belfast
99
Court_1
Craigavon
100 Monkstown_1
Newtownabbey
27
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Belfast NUTS 3 area
Map 4.2 shows the distribution of multiple deprivation in
Belfast NUTS 3 area, which is equivalent to Belfast LGD.
The darkest areas represent the most deprived SOAs when
considering all SOAs in Northern Ireland i.e. those areas in
the most deprived decile (10%) in Northern Ireland, rather
than Belfast alone.
The map shows that deprivation levels in Belfast LGD vary
considerably. In total approximately one third (51) of
Belfast’s 150 SOAs are in the most deprived decile in
Northern Ireland. The majority of these areas are situated in
the west and north of Belfast. The most deprived area in
Belfast (Whiterock_2 SOA) at rank 1 in the multiple
deprivation measure is also the most deprived in Northern
Ireland.
The ‘bar code’ in figure 4.1 below shows the distribution of
deprivation in Belfast LGD. Each of the 150 SOAs in Belfast
LGD is represented by one vertical bar, with the most
deprived areas appearing on the left of the bar code and
the least deprived areas to the right.
The large concentration of lines to the left reflects the large
number of areas in Belfast LGD ranked as the most
deprived areas, while the smaller grouping towards the
right reflects the number of areas ranked as less deprived
in the multiple deprivation measure.
Belfast LGD also contains some of the least deprived
areas, mostly located in the east and south of Belfast. In
total 17 SOAs in Belfast LGD are in the least deprived
decile in Northern Ireland. The least deprived area in Belfast
(Stormont_2 SOA) is ranked 889 in the multiple deprivation
measure.
Figure 4.1 Distribution of Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks in Belfast NUTS 3 area
Most deprived
28
Least deprived
Map 4.2 Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks for SOAs in Belfast NUTS 3 area
29
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Outer Belfast NUTS 3 area
Map 4.3 shows the distribution of deprivation in Outer
Belfast NUTS 3 area, which is equivalent to Carrickfergus,
Castlereagh, Lisburn, Newtownabbey and North Down
LGDs and contains 198 SOAs. The darkest areas represent
the most deprived SOAs when considering all SOAs in
Northern Ireland i.e. those areas in the most deprived decile
(10%) in Northern Ireland, rather than Outer Belfast alone.
Less than 5% (9) of the Outer Belfast SOAs feature in the
most deprived decile in Northern Ireland. Eight of the nine
SOAs are located in Lisburn LGD and one in
Newtownabbey LGD. The most deprived SOA in Outer
Belfast (Collin Glen_3 SOA in Lisburn LGD) is ranked at 16
in Northern Ireland.
The majority of areas (71%) in Outer Belfast are in the least
deprived five deciles with more than a quarter of the SOAs
in Outer Belfast (53) ranked in the least deprived decile in
Northern Ireland. The least deprived SOA in Outer Belfast
(Wallace Park_1 SOA in Lisburn LGD) is also the least
deprived area in Northern Ireland.
Figure 4.2 illustrates the distribution of deprivation in Outer
Belfast, with each SOA depicted by a vertical line, and the
most deprived areas on the left of the bar code and the
least deprived on the right. The large concentration to the
right hand side of the bar code indicates that there are a
large number of areas in Outer Belfast featuring in the least
deprived deciles.
Figure 4.2 Distribution of Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks in Outer Belfast NUTS 3 area
Most deprived
30
Least deprived
Map 4.3 Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks for SOAs in Outer Belfast NUTS 3 area
31
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
East of Northern Ireland
NUTS 3 area
Map 4.4 shows the distribution of deprivation in the East of
Northern Ireland NUTS 3 area. The East of Northern is
equivalent to Antrim, Ards, Ballymena, Banbridge,
Craigavon, Down and Larne LGDs and contains 215 SOAs.
The map shows that there are relatively few areas in the
East of Northern Ireland that are in the most deprived decile
in Northern Ireland. Of the four areas in the most deprived
decile, three are in Craigavon LGD and one is in
Downpatrick in Down LGD. Drumnamoe_1 SOA in
Craigavon LGD is the most deprived SOA in the East of
Northern Ireland is ranked 31 in terms of multiple
deprivation measure.
In total 16 SOAs (7%) in the East of Northern Ireland were
ranked in the least deprived decile in Northern Ireland. The
least deprived SOA in the East of Northern Ireland
(Galgorm_2 SOA in Ballymena LGD) is ranked 871 out 890
SOAs.
The bar code in Figure 4.3 below represents the distribution
of deprivation in East of Northern Ireland, with each SOA
depicted by a vertical line and the most deprived areas on
the left of the bar code and the least deprived on the right.
The bar code shows a relatively even dispersion of
deprivation ranks across the deciles in the East of Northern
Ireland, with the exception of relatively few areas in the
most deprived decile.
Figure 4.3 Distribution of Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks in East of Northern Ireland
NUTS 3 area
Most deprived
32
Least deprived
Map 4.4 Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks for SOAs in East of Northern Ireland NUTS 3 area
33
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
West & South of Northern
Ireland NUTS 3 area
Map 4.5 shows the distribution of deprivation in West and
South of Northern Ireland NUTS 3 area which is equivalent
to Armagh, Cookstown, Dungannon, Fermanagh
Magherafelt, Newry & Mourne and Omagh LGDs and is
made up of 180 SOAs.
The map shows that there are very few areas in the West
and South of Northern Ireland in the most deprived decile.
Only four areas (2%) were ranked in the most deprived
decile, located in Newry & Mourne, Omagh, Dungannon
and Fermanagh LGDs. The most deprived area was
Drumgullion_1 SOA in Newry and Mourne LGD at rank 71.
Although there are few areas in West and South of Northern
Ireland in the most deprived decile, there were no areas in
the least deprived decile. In fact the majority (52%) of SOAs
in West and South of Northern Ireland occupied the middle
three deciles. The least deprived area is ranked 796 out of
890 SOAs and is Glebe_1 SOA in Magherafelt LGD.
Figure 4.4 below illustrates the distribution of deprivation in
the West and South of Northern Ireland, with each SOA
depicted by a vertical line and the most deprived areas on
the left of the bar code and the least deprived on the right.
The bar code highlights that the majority of areas were
ranked in the middle deciles while few areas in the West
and South of Northern Ireland experienced the highest or
lowest deprivation.
Figure 4.4 Distribution of Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks in West & South of Northern
Ireland NUTS 3 area
Most deprived
34
Least deprived
Map 4.5 Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks for SOAs in West & South of Northern Ireland
NUTS 3 area
35
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
North of Northern Ireland
NUTS 3 area
Map 4.6 shows the distribution of deprivation in the North
of Northern Ireland NUTS 3 area, which is equivalent to
Ballymoney, Coleraine, Derry, Limavady, Moyle and
Strabane LGDs and contains 147 SOAs.
The map shows clusters of deprivation in Derry, Strabane,
Limavady and Coleraine, all of which contain SOAs ranked
in the most deprived decile. In total, 21 (14%) SOAs in the
North of Northern Ireland are ranked in the most deprived
decile in Northern Ireland, with the most deprived SOA in
the area (Creggan Central_1 SOA in Derry LGD) ranked 10
in the multiple deprivation measure.
Only three (2%) SOAs in the North of Northern Ireland were
placed in the least deprived decile in Northern Ireland, all of
which were in Coleraine LGD. Strand_2 SOA in Coleraine
LGD is the least deprived area and was ranked 862 in the
multiple deprivation measure.
The bar code below in Figure 4.5 represents the distribution
of deprivation in the North of Northern Ireland, with each
SOA depicted by a line and the most deprived areas on the
left of the bar code and the least deprived on the right. The
bar code highlights that few of the areas in the North of
Northern Ireland were ranked in the least deprived deciles.
Figure 4.5 Distribution of Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks in North of Northern Ireland
NUTS 3 area
Most deprived
36
Least deprived
Map 4.6 Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks for SOAs in North of Northern Ireland NUTS 3 area
37
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Rural Areas
Areas in Northern Ireland can be classed as either urban or
rural according to the ‘Statistical Classification and
Delineation of Settlements‘ report produced by the InterDepartmental Urban-Rural Definition Group in February
2005.16 This report proposed an eight-band categorization
of settlements, which runs from Band A (Belfast
Metropolitan Urban Area) to Band H (small village, hamlet
and open countryside). Areas classed in bands A to E,
Belfast Metropolitan Urban Area to small town, are defined
as urban while those classed in bands F to H, intermediate
settlement to small village, hamlet and open countryside,
are classed as rural.
Using this classification the 890 SOAs in Northern Ireland
were defined as either urban or rural. Approximately one
third of SOAs (286) were classed as rural and two-thirds
(604) were classed as urban.
Although SOAs were designed to have similar population
sizes to aid comparisons across Northern Ireland, due to
the smaller geographical size and the relatively
homogenous populations of urban areas compared to rural
areas, small area concentrations of deprivation are more
readily identified in urban areas than rural areas. This
should be noted when comparing deprivation measures in
urban and rural areas. It may also be more appropriate
when assessing deprivation in rural areas to focus on the
Output Area results. See page 56.
Table 4.2 below shows the twenty most deprived rural
areas, as per the Multiple Deprivation Measure. Castlederg
SOA in Strabane LGD is the most deprived rural SOA,
ranked as the 97th most deprived SOA in Northern Ireland.
It is notable that at rank 97 the most deprived rural SOA is
outside the most deprived decile when all SOAs in
Northern Ireland are considered.
The second and third most deprived rural SOAs are
Crossmaglen (in Newry and Mourne LGD) and Glenderg (in
Strabane LGD), ranked 112 and 126 respectively. Seven of
the twenty most deprived rural SOAs are in Strabane LGD,
and three are in Newry and Mourne LGD.
The least deprived rural SOA is Lisbane_2 in Ards LGD,
ranked 850 in the multiple deprivation measure. Eleven
rural SOAs (4% of all rural SOAs) are in the least deprived
decile.
Table 4.2 Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010: The twenty most deprived rural areas
16
NIMDM 2010 Rank (1 is most deprived)
Super Output Area
Local Government District
97
112
126
134
136
141
159
170
178
179
180
182
184
189
191
197
198
200
202
215
Castlederg
Crossmaglen
Glenderg
Newtownstewart
Ardboe
Sion Mills
Portaferry_2
Dunnamanagh
Ardglass_1
Finn
Pomeroy
Silver Bridge_1
Creggan
Dungiven
Keady
Clare
Armoy_&_Moss-side and Moyarget
Fintona
Irvinestown
Ballylough_&_Bushmills
Strabane
Newry and Mourne
Strabane
Strabane
Cookstown
Strabane
Ards
Strabane
Down
Strabane
Cookstown
Newry and Mourne
Newry and Mourne
Limavady
Armagh
Strabane
Moyle
Omagh
Fermanagh
Moyle
The Report of the Inter-Departmental Urban-Rural Definition Group, Statistical Classification and Delineation of Settlements, February 2005
http://www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk/mapxtreme_towns/Reports/ur_report.pdf &
http://www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk/mapxtreme/viewdata/Compendia_and_Reference/Area_classifications/UrbanRuralClassification2005.xls
38
The bar code below in Figure 4.6 represents the distribution
of deprivation in rural areas, with each SOA depicted by a
line and the most deprived areas on the left of the bar code
and the least deprived on the right. The bar code highlights
that few of the SOAs within rural areas were ranked in the
most deprived deciles in Northern Ireland while a large
proportion of rural deciles featured in the middle deciles.
Figure 4.6 Distribution of Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 ranks in rural areas
Most deprived
Least deprived
Domain Super Output
Area Results
The Living Environment and Crime & Disorder Domain
ranks are also positively correlated with each other and the
four domains described above, but to a lesser extent, with
all pair-wise correlations at least +0.48.
Six of the seven deprivation domain ranks at SOA level are
positively correlated with each other indicating that an area
experiencing one form of deprivation is likely to also
experience other forms of deprivation. Of particular note
were the strong positive correlations between the Income,
Employment, Health Deprivation & Disability and
Education, Skills & Training Domain ranks, with each pairwise correlation at least +0.84. (Correlation coefficient
ranges from perfect negative correlation -1, to perfect
positive correlation +1).
The Proximity to Services Domain ranks show weak
negative correlations with the other six domains,
suggesting that as Proximity to Services deprivation
increases, deprivation in the other domains is likely to
decrease. The table below shows the deprivation domain
correlations for the SOA results.
Table 4.3 SOA level correlations between deprivation domain ranks
Income
Income
Employment
Health
Education, Skills & Training
Proximity to Services
Living Environment
Crime & Disorder
NIMDM 201017
17
1.00
0.94
0.94
0.88
-0.32
0.61
0.55
0.97
Employment
1.00
0.93
0.84
-0.29
0.54
0.48
0.95
Health
Deprivation
& Disability
1.00
0.85
-0.37
0.59
0.55
0.94
Education,
Skills
& Training
1.00
-0.36
0.64
0.54
0.91
Proximity
to Services
1.00
-0.52
-0.66
-0.27
Living
Environment
1.00
0.63
0.65
Crime &
Disorder
1.00
0.53
When considering the correlations between the domains and the overall measure it is worth noting the domain weights used to combine domains into the Multiple
Deprivation Measure.
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Although the domains are highly correlated there are
noticeable differences across domains in the distribution of
deprivation in Northern Ireland. The following maps display
the results for each of the domains.
Income Deprivation Domain
Three Income Deprivation measures were created: The
Income Deprivation Domain considers the total income
deprived population while the Income Deprivation Affecting
Children and Income Deprivation Affecting Older People
measures consider those aged under 16 years and those
aged 60 years and over who are income deprived.
Map 4.7 shows the Income Deprivation Domain ranks for
Northern Ireland. The distribution of income deprivation is
similar to the distribution of multiple deprivation in Northern
Ireland with Belfast and Derry LGDs containing the majority
of areas in the most deprived decile. Craigavon, Lisburn,
Newry & Mourne, Newtownabbey and Strabane LGDs
contain clusters of deprived areas. The least deprived areas
are generally located in the east of Northern Ireland with the
majority located in Ards, Belfast, Castlereagh, Lisburn,
Newtownabbey and North Down LGDs.
The Income Deprivation Affecting Children ranks for
Northern Ireland are shown in Map 4.8. The distribution of
income deprivation affecting children is broadly similar to
the income domain distribution. Belfast and Derry LGDs
contain much of the most deprived decile of areas. The
least deprived areas are located mostly in the east of
Northern Ireland as was the case with the income
deprivation domain.
Map 4.9 shows the Income Deprivation Affecting Older
People ranks for Northern Ireland. As with income
deprivation and income deprivation affecting children,
Belfast and Derry LGDs contain the majority of the areas in
the most deprived decile. However the south and west
have greater numbers of SOAs with income deprivation
affecting older people than income deprivation affecting
children.
40
Map 4.7 Income Deprivation Domain for Northern Ireland (SOAs)
41
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Map 4.8 Income Deprivation Affecting Children Measure for Northern Ireland (SOAs)
42
Map 4.9 Income Deprivation Affecting Older People Measure for Northern Ireland (SOAs)
43
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Employment Deprivation
Domain
The Employment Deprivation Domain ranks for Northern
Ireland are shown in Map 4.10. The distribution of
employment deprivation is similar to the distribution of
multiple deprivation in Northern Ireland with Belfast, Derry
and Lisburn LGDs containing the majority of areas in the
most deprived decile. Craigavon, Newry & Mourne,
Newtownabbey and Strabane LGDs also contain clusters
of the most deprived areas in Northern Ireland. The least
deprived areas tend to be located in the east of Northern
Ireland with a cluster of areas with low levels of deprivation
evident in Coleraine LGD.
44
Map 4.10 Employment Deprivation Domain for Northern Ireland (SOAs)
45
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Health Deprivation and
Disability Domain
Map 4.11 shows the Health Deprivation and Disability
Domain ranks for Northern Ireland. The distribution of
health and disability deprivation is similar to the distribution
of multiple deprivation. Belfast and Derry LGDs contain a
large number of the areas in the most deprived decile and
there are clusters of deprivation in Lisburn and Craigavon
LGDs. The least deprived areas tend to be in the east of
Northern Ireland with clusters of low deprivation also visible
in Ballymena and Coleraine LGDs.
46
Map 4.11 Health Deprivation and Disability Domain for Northern Ireland (SOAs)
47
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Education, Skills and
Training Deprivation Domain
The Education, Skills and Training ranks for Northern
Ireland are shown in Map 4.12. The most deprived areas
are located in Belfast and Derry LGDs. Belfast and Lisburn
LGDs contain clusters of areas in both the most and least
deprived deciles in Northern Ireland. A large proportion of
the remaining least deprived areas are located in the east of
Northern Ireland, in Ards, Castlereagh, Newtownabbey and
North Down LGDs.
48
Map 4.12 Education, Skills and Training Deprivation Domain for Northern Ireland (SOAs)
49
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Proximity to Services Domain
Map 4.13 shows the Proximity to Services Domain ranks
for Northern Ireland. The distribution of proximity to
services deprivation is unlike all of the other domains and
captures an important aspect of deprivation. The highest
concentrations of deprivation with respect to proximity to
services occur outside of towns and cities. Fermanagh and
Omagh LGDs have the greatest number of areas in the
most deprived decile. There are also deprived areas on the
outskirts of towns in Ballymena, Cookstown, Down,
Dungannon, Limavady, Newry and Mourne, and Strabane
LGDs. The least deprived areas are located in Belfast,
Derry and Craigavon LGDs.
50
Map 4.13 Proximity to Services Domain for Northern Ireland (SOAs)
51
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Living Environment Domain
The Living Environment Domain ranks for Northern Ireland
are shown in Map 4.14. The highest concentrations of
deprived areas are located in Belfast and Derry LGDs and
in the north. Clusters of deprived areas exist in Ballymena
and Larne LGDs. The least deprived areas are spread
across most of Northern Ireland with particular clusters of
areas with low levels of deprivation visible in Castlereagh,
Craigavon, Lisburn and North Down LGDs.
52
Map 4.14 Living Environment Domain for Northern Ireland (SOAs)
53
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Crime and Disorder Domain
Map 4.15 shows the distribution of the Crime and Disorder
Domain ranks across Northern Ireland. The most deprived
areas are clustered in towns and cities while the least
deprived areas are rural. The majority of areas in the most
deprived decile are in Belfast LGD with clusters visible in
large towns and cities. The least deprived areas are
generally located away from towns and cities and involve
many LGDs across all of Northern Ireland with the
exception of the Greater Belfast area.
54
Map 4.15 Crime and Disorder Domain for Northern Ireland (SOAs)
55
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
NIMDM 2010 Output Area
Results
A multiple deprivation measure and domain ranks for the
Income, Employment, Proximity to Services and Crime &
Disorder Domains were created at the Output Area (OA)
geography. 5,022 OAs cover Northern Ireland each with an
approximate population of 350 people.
The OA Multiple Deprivation Measure (MDM) was
constructed from OA and SOA results. The creation of the
MDM at OA level allows the identification of smaller
pockets of deprivation than the SOA results.
The majority of indicators in the Education, Skills & Training
Domain, the Health Deprivation and Disability Domain and
the Living Environment Domain were created at OA level by
assigning SOA results to constituent OAs. For a number of
indicators in the Education, Skills and Training and Health
Deprivation and Disability Domain, actual OA level results
were created. In terms of indicator weight, 86% of the
overall OA Multiple Deprivation Measure was calculated at
the OA level.
Map 4.16 presents the OA results for the Multiple
Deprivation Measure. The general distribution of multiple
deprivation at OA is similar to the distribution at SOA level,
with notable concentrations of deprivation in Belfast and
Derry LGDs. In addition, small pockets of deprivation are
identified in each LGD at OA level, with all LGDs having at
least one OA within the 20% most deprived OAs in
Northern Ireland. The most deprived OAs in Northern
Ireland are in the Whiterock, New Lodge and Shankill areas
of Belfast LGD.
56
With the exception of Strabane, all LGDs had at least one
OA in the 20% least deprived OAs in Northern Ireland. The
least deprived OA in Northern Ireland is in the Cherryvalley
area of Belfast LGD.
The OA measures also identified pockets of deprivation
within rural areas, showing fifteen rural OAs in the 10%
most deprived OAs in Northern Ireland. The most deprived
rural OA is in the Crossmaglen area in Newry and Mourne
LGD and is ranked 109th most deprived out of 5,022 OAs.
The least deprived rural OA is ranked 4,998 out of 5,022
OAs and is in the Templepatrick area of Antrim LGD.
Map 4.16 Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010 (OAs)
57
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
NIMDM 2010 Summary
Measures
Local Government Districts and Assembly Areas
The Extent Score, Income Deprived Scale and Employment
Deprived Scale for the Local Government Districts (LGDs)
and Assembly Areas (AAs) are presented below in Table 4.4
and Table 4.5 respectively.
The Extent Score shows the percentage of an area’s
population living in the most deprived SOAs in the country.
It includes 100% of the people living in the 10% most
deprived SOAs plus a proportion of the population of those
SOAs in the next two deciles. See Technical Annex for
further details.
The LGD with the highest Extent Score is Belfast LGD,
where 46% of the population live in the most deprived
SOAs in Northern Ireland. Strabane and Derry LGDs were
ranked second and third with 44% and 43% of their
populations living in the most deprived SOAs respectively.
The LGDs with the lowest proportion of their population
living in the most deprived SOAs as measured by the
Extent Score, are Magherafelt, Ballymoney and North
Down LGDs with 2-3% of each of their populations living in
the most deprived SOAs.
The AA with the highest Extent Score is Belfast West where
more than three quarters of the population live in the most
deprived SOAs. Belfast North and Foyle AAs were ranked
second and third on the Extent Score with 59% and 43%
of their populations living in the most deprived SOAs in
Northern Ireland. The AAs with the lowest proportion of
their population living in the most deprived SOAs as
measured by the Extent Score are North Down (3%),
Fermanagh & South Tyrone (5%), Strangford (5%) and
South Antrim (5%) AAs.
The Income and Employment Deprived Scales present the
number of people who are identified as income or
employment deprived in the Income and Employment
Deprivation Domains at the LGD and AA geographies.
These values are also expressed as a rate of the total
population and working age population respectively for the
Income and Employment Scale. For further details on the
calculation and worked examples see the Technical Annex:
Creating Summary Measures.
The LGD with the greatest number of income deprived
people is Belfast LGD, which also had the highest number
of people identified as employment deprived. The LGDs
58
with the second and third highest number of people
identified as income deprived were Derry and Newry &
Mourne LGDs. Derry and Newry & Mourne LGDs also have
the second and third highest number of people identified as
employment deprived.
At the other end of the scale the LGDs with the lowest
number of income deprived people are Moyle, Larne and
Carrickfergus LGDs. Moyle, Larne and Ballymoney LGDs
were identified as the LGDs with the lowest number of
employment deprived residents.
Although it is important to assess the sheer number of
people who are income and employment deprived in an
area, it is also useful to compare the proportion of an area’s
population experiencing forms of deprivation.
The Income Deprived Scale can be expressed as a
percentage of the total population in an area to give the
percentage of people income deprived. The LGD with the
highest percentage of people income deprived is Derry
LGD where 38% of the population were identified as
income deprived. Strabane LGD (36%) and Belfast LGD
(35%) have the second and third highest percentage of
income deprived people in their area.
The LGDs with the highest percentage of working age
population who are employment deprived are Strabane,
Derry and Belfast where 20%, 18% and 16% of their
working age populations were identified as employment
deprived. At 9 - 10% North Down, Castlereagh and
Newtownabbey have the lowest rates of employment
deprived people.
The AA with the highest percentage of income deprived
people is Belfast West, where over half of the population
(51%) were identified as income deprived. Belfast North
(42%) and Foyle (38%) AAs were ranked second and third
in terms of the percentage of people income deprived with
approximately two-fifths of the population experiencing
income deprivation. North Down (15%), Lagan Valley (16%)
and South Antrim (17%) AAs have the lowest percentages
of their population identified as income deprived.
Belfast West, Belfast North and Foyle AAs also have the
highest percentage of working age populations who are
employment deprived, with 24%, 20% and 18% of their
working age populations experiencing this form of
deprivation. The AAs with the lowest percentage of working
age populations employment deprived are North Down,
Belfast South and Lagan Valley AAs, where less than 1 in
ten people in each AA were identified as employment
deprived.
Table 4.4: Local Government District (LGD) Summary Measures (Rank 1 is most deprived)
Local Government District
Extent
Score, %
(rank)
Income
Deprived
Scale (rank)
Percentage of total
population income
deprived (rank)
Employment
Deprived
Scale (rank)
Percentage of working
age population employment
deprived (rank)
Antrim
5 (20)
9,328 (20)
18 (24)
3,368 (18)
11 (21)
Ards
7 (18)
14,005 (10)
18 (22)
4,944 (8)
11 (19)
Armagh
5 (19)
12,695 (14)
22 (15)
4,117 (11)
12 (11)
Ballymena
12 (11)
11,844 (15)
19 (20)
3,744 (16)
10 (23)
Ballymoney
2 (25)
7,162 (23)
24 (11)
2,303 (24)
13 (10)
Banbridge
4 (23)
8,758 (22)
19 (21)
3,272 (19)
12 (15)
Belfast
46 (1)
93,511 (1)
35 (3)
26,095 (1)
16 (3)
Carrickfergus
10 (14)
7,153 (24)
18 (23)
2,543 (23)
11 (20)
Castlereagh
5 (21)
10,040 (17)
15 (25)
3,524 (17)
9 (25)
Coleraine
12 (10)
13,550 (12)
24 (12)
3,974 (13)
12 (14)
Cookstown
10 (15)
9,536 (18)
27 (7)
3,023 (22)
14 (5)
Craigavon
21 (4)
22,808 (5)
25 (10)
7,385 (5)
14 (9)
Derry
43 (3)
41,487 (2)
38 (1)
11,884 (2)
18 (2)
Down
8 (16)
15,276 (7)
22 (14)
5,002 (6)
12 (13)
Dungannon
11 (12)
14,002 (11)
25 (9)
4,074 (12)
12 (12)
Fermanagh
4 (22)
14,214 (9)
23 (13)
3,845 (15)
11 (22)
Larne
11 (13)
6,348 (25)
20 (18)
2,112 (25)
12 (17)
Limavady
16 (7)
9,522 (19)
28 (5)
3,158 (20)
15 (4)
Lisburn
18 (6)
24,729 (4)
22 (16)
7,531 (4)
11 (18)
Magherafelt
2 (26)
9,314 (21)
21 (17)
3,052 (21)
12 (16)
Moyle
12 (9)
4,682 (26)
28 (6)
1,353 (26)
14 (6)
Newry and Mourne
19 (5)
28,156 (3)
29 (4)
7,864 (3)
14 (7)
Newtownabbey
13 (8)
15,818 (6)
19 (19)
4,990 (7)
10 (24)
North Down
3 (24)
11,433 (16)
14 (26)
3,903 (14)
9 (26)
Omagh
7 (17)
13,291 (13)
26 (8)
4,285 (10)
14 (8)
Strabane
44 (2)
14,394 (8)
36 (2)
4,603 (9)
20 (1)
59
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Table 4.5: Assembly Area (AA) Summary Measures (Rank 1 is most deprived)
Extent Score, %
(rank)
Income
Deprived
Scale (rank)
Percentage of total
population income
deprived (rank)
Employment
Deprived
Scale (rank)
Percentage of working
age population employment
deprived (rank)
Belfast East
19 (6)
Belfast North
59 (2)
18,355 (12)
23 (9)
5,223 (17)
11 (11)
34,825 (3)
42 (2)
9,283 (4)
20 (2)
Belfast South
Belfast West
20 (5)
17,502 (15)
19 (13)
5,473 (16)
9 (17)
76 (1)
42,664 (1)
51 (1)
11,625 (2)
24 (1)
East Antrim
East Londonderry
10 (10)
16,151 (17)
18 (14)
5,511 (15)
11 (13)
14 (9)
23,072 (10)
25 (7)
7,132 (10)
13 (7)
Fermanagh and South Tyrone 5 (17)
22,741 (11)
22 (10)
6,517 (11)
11 (12)
Assembly Area
Foyle
43 (3)
41,487 (2)
38 (3)
11,884 (1)
18 (3)
Lagan Valley
7 (14)
17,572 (14)
16 (17)
6,069 (14)
9 (16)
Mid Ulster
9 (12)
24,326 (8)
25 (6)
7,476 (8)
13 (8)
Newry and Armagh
17 (8)
30,654 (4)
28 (5)
8,783 (6)
14 (5)
North Antrim
9 (11)
23,689 (9)
22 (12)
7,401 (9)
12 (10)
North Down
3 (18)
13,446 (18)
15 (18)
4,515 (18)
9 (18)
South Antrim
5 (15)
17,851 (13)
17 (16)
6,307 (12)
10 (15)
South Down
7 (13)
25,911 (7)
22 (11)
8,428 (7)
12 (9)
Strangford
5 (16)
17,278 (16)
17 (15)
6,143 (13)
10 (14)
Upper Bann
18 (7)
27,851 (5)
24 (8)
9,290 (3)
14 (6)
West Tyrone
23 (4)
27,685 (6)
30 (4)
8,888 (5)
16 (4)
60
Technical Annex
Geography of Northern Ireland
The NIMDM 2010 results and summary measures are
presented at the following geographical levels; Output
Area; Super Output Area; Electoral Ward; Local
Government District; and Assembly Area.
Output Areas (OAs) were created as an output geography
for the Census 2001. Output Areas (OAs) are the smallest
geographical unit, representing areas of approximately 350
people. 5,022 OAs cover Northern Ireland.
Super Output Areas (SOAs) were created as the primary
output geography for the 2005 deprivation results and are
the main geographical unit for the 2010 results. The 890
SOAs have an average population of approximately 2,000
people, with a minimum population of approximately 1,000
and a maximum population of approximately 3,700 (2008
Small Area Population Estimates). SOAs were constructed
from OAs, taking population, housing characteristics and
ward boundaries into account. As such OAs nest within
SOAs and in the majority of cases SOAs are equivalent to
wards or sub-divisions of wards.
Electoral Wards: Ward level results are based on the 1992
Boundary Commission. Electoral Wards are administrative
geographies and nest within Local Government Districts.
There are 582 Electoral Wards in Northern Ireland. The 582
Electoral Wards have an average population of
approximately 3,000 people with a minimum population of
approximately 700 and a maximum population of
approximately 9,500 (2008 Small Area Population
Estimates). SOAs are more evenly sized than Electoral
Wards allowing more meaningful area based comparisons.
As such SOAs are the primary output geography for the
NIMDM 2010, while summary measures were created for
Electoral Wards.
Local Government Districts (LGDs): LGD results are
based on the 1992 LGD boundaries. There are 26 LGDs in
Northern Ireland.
Assembly Areas (AAs): AA results are based on the 1992
AA boundaries. There are 18 AAs in Northern Ireland.
Wards nest within AAs. It should be noted that the 18 AAs
are not equivalent to the current 18 Westminster
Parliamentary Constituencies formed in 2010.
NUTS 3 Areas: Nomenclature of Units for Territorial
Statistics (NUTS) is a classification of administrative areas,
used across the European Union for statistical purposes.
The Northern Ireland NUTS 3 areas are an amalgamation of
LGDs, grouped as follows:
NUTS 3 Area
Belfast
Outer Belfast
East of NI
North of NI
West & South of NI
LGD
Belfast
Carrickfergus
Antrim
Ballymoney
Armagh
Castlereagh
Ards
Coleraine
Cookstown
Lisburn
Ballymena
Derry
Dungannon
Newtownabbey
Banbridge
Limavady
Fermanagh
North Down
Craigavon
Moyle
Magherafelt
Down
Strabane
Larne
Newry & Mourne
Omagh
Deprivation results were not produced at NUTS 3 areas but
were included in the report when describing SOA results.
61
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Figure TA.1 Northern Ireland Administrative and Statistical Geography (1992 Boundary Commission / 2001 Census)
5 NUTS 3 Areas
18 Assembly Areas
26 Local Government Districts
582 Electoral Wards
890 Super Output Areas
5022 Census Output Areas
62
Geocoding
As the NIMDM 2010 is a spatial measure of deprivation it is
important that address and locational information were
coded to small geographical areas in a consistent manner
to allow accurate aggregation of records to the
geographies described above. In the majority of cases data
were supplied with a postcode as the geographic identifier.
The Central Postcode Directory 2009 (available from
NISRA18) was used to assign postcoded records to OAs
and SOAs to maintain consistency.
Apportioning
Where less than 98% of records in a dataset supplied to
the deprivation team contained a detailed small area
geographic identifier, unassigned records were apportioned
to areas.
To apportion data, unidentified records are distributed to
geographies based on the number of cases known to
occur in those areas. For apportioning to add value to a
dataset used to create an ordinal result, an additional piece
of information is required on which the apportionment is
based. Within the Education, Skills and Training Domain,
for example, the additional information was often the
school that pupils attended. This allowed any unallocated
pupil data to be apportioned to areas when data were not
completely geocoded.
For example it is known for a high proportion of records the
area in which a pupil resides and the school they attend. In
a small proportion of cases only the school attended is
known. Where both pieces of information are known it is
possible to say for a given school that x% of pupils reside
in Area X, y% in Area Y, and z% in Area Z. The small
proportion of unknown cases can be assigned to areas
using the ratios above, on a school by school basis.
Indicator Rates
Small Area Population Estimates
The small area population estimates used in the deprivation
analysis range from 2001 to 2008 and were created from an
average of two statistical methods; the ratio change and
cohort-component methods. The ratio change method
applies the change in secondary, typically administrative,
data sources over the period 2001-08 to the 2001 Census
population estimates. The cohort-component method
updates the Census estimates by ‘ageing on’ populations
and applying information on births, deaths and migration.
An average of both methods is taken and constrained to
the published population figures for Northern Ireland and
Local Government Districts. A separate publication with a
more detailed description of the methodology and analysis
of small area population estimates is available from
NISRA.19
Standardising Data
The majority of indicators within the Health Deprivation and
Disability Domain take the form of age and gender
standardised ratios. Such ratios control for differences in
age and gender characteristics of populations across
areas. This is of particular importance when measuring
health deprivation, as all other things being equal, higher
levels of health deprivation are expected in areas with a
higher proportion of older people. Without controlling for
the effect of age, an area with a higher number of older
people would therefore appear more deprived while areas
with a younger population experiencing an unusually high
level of health deprivation may not be identified.
The indirect method of standardisation was used to control
for these effects. This method compares the number of
occurrences in an area (of cancer for example) to that
which would be expected given the age and gender
characteristics of the area. The expected number of
occurrences for each area is calculated by applying the age
and gender specific reference rate (in this case Northern
Ireland rate) to each age and gender group in the small
area.
The majority of indicators take the form of rates of the
relevant population or standardised ratios of observed to
expected counts/occurrences. The creation of rates and
ratios allows meaningful comparison of results across areas
by taking population characteristics and/or population size
into account. For both types of indicator small area
population estimates were used.
18
NISRA Geography website http://www.nisra.gov.uk/geography/default.asp.htm
19
NISRA Small Area Population Estimates website http://www.nisra.gov.uk/demography/default.asp125.htm
63
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
For example, if the occurrence rate in Northern Ireland for
females in age group A was a% and females in age group
B was b%, while the occurrence rate in Northern Ireland for
males in age group C was c% and males in age group D
was d%, the expected number of occurrences in a small
area with A1 females of age group A, B1 females of age
group B, C1 males of age group C and D1 males of age
group D is:
(A1 x a%) + (B1 x b%) + (C1 x c%) + (D1 x d%)
The standardised ratio is therefore: [observed count /
expected] * 100
= [observed count / ((A1 x a%) + (B1 x b%) + (C1 x c%) +
(D1 x d%))] * 100
A resulting observed to expected ratio greater than 100
indicates an area with higher occurrences than expected,
while values less than 100 indicate an area with less
occurrences than expected.
Shrinkage
Unlike the NIMDM 2005, indicators in the NIMDM 2010
have not been subjected to shrinkage estimation.
Shrinkage is a technique that moves ‘unreliable’ SOA
scores towards another more robust score. In the NIMDM
2005 the ‘more robust score’ was the LGD average for a
given indicator and the unreliability of an indicator was
determined by its standard error. The unreliability of an
indicator in essence is determined by the size of the ‘at
risk’ population in an area, as with, for example, the same
indicator rate a smaller ‘at risk’ population leads to a larger
standard error, and so a more unreliable indicator.
Combination into
Sub-Domains, Domains
and the Multiple Deprivation
Measure
In total the NIMDM 2010 contains 52 indicators across
seven separate domains. A number of methods were
employed to combine indicators within sub-domains and
domains; combine sub-domains within domains; and to
combine the separate domains into the overall multiple
deprivation measure.
Normal Transformation
The majority of indicators are initially calculated as rates or
ratios to control for variations in population size or
characteristics before combining within a sub-domain or
domain.
To combine the indicators it is necessary they are
measured on comparable scales, so that small values are
not dominated unintentionally by large values. The indicator
values are therefore ranked from most deprived to least
deprived and transformed to a standard normal
distribution. This has the effect that the most deprived area
in each indicator will have the same value.
The transformed scores range from approximately -3 to +3
as follows:
Figure TA.2 Histogram showing transformation of
Super Output Area ranks to a standard normal
distribution
As the size of the ‘at risk’ population is the determining
factor in an indicator’s reliability, the NIMDM 2010
indicators comprise additional years of data where
possible. This has the effect of increasing the size of the ‘at
risk’ population and correspondingly, the reliability of the
indicator.
Where additional years of data were not available, ward
averages have been substituted for SOA results at an
indicator level. Specifically a small number of SOAs were
assigned their ward average for indicators within the
Primary and Post-Primary Sub-Domains in the Education,
Skills and Training Domain. This substitution was carried
out where the ‘at risk’ population was small, for example
the number of pupils taking Key Stage 2 examinations in
student areas.
64
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
The normalised indicator scores can be combined with
relevant weights to form a sub-domain or domain.
4
Factor Analysis
The weights given to the indicators can be decided before
combining to form sub-domains and domains by drawing
on deprivation theory, views on the relative importance of
indicators in measuring the form of deprivation, and
knowledge on the quality of the underlying data. The
weights applied to the indicators within the Crime and
Disorder and Living Environment Domains were chosen
using this method.
Within the NIMDM 2010, factor analysis has also been
used to determine weights within sub-domains and
domains. This method has been employed where an
underlying form of deprivation is thought to exist, but
cannot be measured perfectly via observed variables. An
underlying unobserved factor such as this is often referred
to as a latent variable.
To carry out a factor analysis a group of indicators are
chosen that are related to the underlying factor, in this case
deprivation, but are thought to be imperfect measures of
that factor i.e. indicators which measure the latent variable
with some error. Factor analysis assumes that the
measurement error (e1 to e5 in the diagram below) in each
of the related indicators is not correlated, and that those
indicators most correlated with the latent variable will be
highly correlated with the other indicators in the model.
Figure TA.3 Latent Variable Model
Indicator 1
Indicator 2
e1
e2
By analysing the correlations between the indicators,
inferences can be made about the common factor and a
factor score can be estimated. In calculating the factor
score, indicator weights are generated, with those
indicators most highly correlated with each other, and so
the underlying factor, receiving the highest weight in the
domain. The resulting factor scores (a weighted
combination of normalised indicators) for each area are
ordered and ranked from the most deprived to least
deprived area to form the sub-domain or domain rank.
Maximum Likelihood factor analysis was used to determine
the indicator weights within the Education, Skills and
Training Domain (Primary and Post-Primary Sub-Domains),
and the Health Deprivation and Disability Domain.
The factor weights are as follows:
Indicator weights for Education, Skills and Training
Deprivation Domain
Education, Skills and Training Domain
Primary Sub-Domain
Key Stage 2 Assessments
Proportion of Children with Special Educational Needs
Absenteeism at Primary Schools
20
Indicator 3
e3
Indicator 4
e4
Indicator 5
e5
19
10
72
Post-Primary Sub-Domain
Key Stage 3 Assessments
GCSE or equivalent qualifications points score
School Leavers Destinations
Higher and Further Education Enrolments
Proportion of Pupils with Special Educational Needs
Absenteeism at Secondary School
22
30
7
7
5
29
Indicator weights for Health Deprivation and Disability
Domain
Health Deprivation and Disability Domain
Deprivation
Indicator Weight (%)20
Potential Years of Life Lost
Comparative Illness and Disability Ratio
Mental Health Indicator
Cancer Registrations
Emergency Admissions Rate
Low Birth Weight
Children’s Dental Extractions
Indicator Weight (%)20
14
50
13
5
11
3
5
Indicator weights may not sum to 100 due to rounding.
65
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Exponential Transformation
When combining sub-domains into domains and domains
into the multiple deprivation measure, sub-domain and
domain scores were exponentially transformed, giving
more weight to the most deprived areas.
The exponential distribution ranges from 0 to 100, with the
most deprived area having a value of 100 and the 10%
most deprived areas having a value of 50 or greater. This
particular form of exponential distribution, such that the
10% most deprived areas have a value of 50 or greater, is
defined by the use of the constant ‘23’. Such a
transformation reduces the extent to which lack of
deprivation in one domain can cancel the effect of
deprivation in another, in the overall multiple deprivation
measure.
The transformation is calculated as follows:
For any SOA, denote its rank on the domain, scaled to the
range [0,1], by R (with R=1/N for the least deprived, and
R=N/N, i.e. R=1, for the most deprived, where N=the
number of SOAs in Northern Ireland).
The transformed domain,
X say, is X = -23*log{1 - R*[1 - exp(-100/23)]}
Calculation of Output Area,
Super Output Area and
Summary Measures
The main NIMDM 2010 results are presented at the Output
Area and Super Output Area geographies. Summary
measures were created for Electoral Wards, Local
Government Districts and Assembly Areas.
Creating Output Area Measures
A multiple deprivation measure and four separate domains
of deprivation are also presented at the Output Area (OA)
geography.
It was possible to create the Income, Employment,
Proximity to Services and Crime and Disorder Domains at
OA level as well as a small number of indicators within the
Health Deprivation and Disability Domain, and the
Education Skills and Training Domain after considering the
robustness of individual indicators at this geography.
Robustness of indicators at the OA level was determined
by assessing the number of observed cases per OA
including the number of OAs without cases, the size of the
population denominator, the geographical level at which the
data were collected and the degree of apportioning.
where log denotes natural logarithm and exp the
exponential or antilog transformation.
Figure TA.4 Plot of exponential transformation
100
Rank (1 = most deprived)
90
80
Weight
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
66
890
89
1
0
Figure TA.5 Components of the Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Income
Deprivation
Employment
Deprivation
Adults and
Children in
households in
receipt of:
IS (A)
SPC (B)
Income based JSA (C)
Income Based ESA (D)
HB (E)
Working Tax
Credit (F)
Child Tax Credit
(G)
Unemployment
Claimant Count
(A)
IB claimants (B)
SDA claimants
(C)
CA claimants
(D)
ESA claimants
(E)
Steps to Work
participants (F)
Sum A:G /total
SOA population
to form domain
score
Sum A:F
/working age
SOA population
to form domain
score
Health
Deprivation
& Disability
Education Skills Proximity to
and Training
Services
Deprivation
Living
Environment*
Crime &
Disorder
Years of
Potential Life
Lost* (A)
Comparative
Illness and
Disability Ratio
(B)
Mood and
Anxiety Disorder
Prescriptions
*(C)
Mental Health
Inpatient Stays*
(D)
Suicides* (E)
Cancer
Registrations*
(F)
Emergency
Admissions (G)
Low Birth
Weight* (H)
Dental
Extractions* (I)
PRIMARY:
Key Stage 2
score* (A)
Absenteeism (B)
Special
Education
Needs* (C)
POST
PRIMARY:
Key Stage 3
score * (D)
GSCE score (E)
School Leavers
Destination* (F)
HE and FE
enrolments* (G)
Special
Education
Needs* (H)
Absenteeism (I)
WORKING
AGE:
No and low
qualifications (J)
Travel Time to:
A&E (A)
GP (B)
Dentist (C)
Pharmacist (D)
Opticians (E)
Job Centre (F)
Post Office (G)
Food Shop (H)
Large Service
Centre (I)
Council Leisure
Centre (J)
Financial
Services (K)
General
Services (L)
HOUSING
QUALITY*:
Decent Home
Standard (A)
Housing Health
and Safety
Rating System
(B)
Combine DEF
with weights
determined by
factor analysis
to form mental
health indicator
–DEF
Combine A:I
with weights
determined by
factor analysis
to form domain
score
Combine A:C
and D:I with
weights
determined by
factor analysis
to form subdomains
J/working age
population (2559 years) to
form subdomain
Combine A:L
with
standardised
equal weights
for B:L and
double weight
for A to form
domain score
Combine A and
B with equal
weights to form
sub-domain
Combine A:D
with equal
weights
Combine E and
F with 60%
weight for F and
40% for E.
Exponentially
transform subdomain ranks
and combine
with equal
weights to form
domain score
Exponentially
transform subdomain ranks
and combine
with 60%
weight for Crime
Sub-Domain
and 40% weight
for Disorder
Sub-Domain to
form domain
score
Transform
domain rank to
exponential
distribution
Transform
domain rank to
exponential
distribution
Exponentially
transform subdomain ranks
and combine
with equal
weights to form
domain score
Transform
domain rank to
exponential
distribution
Transform
domain rank to
exponential
distribution
Transform
domain rank to
exponential
distribution
Transform
domain rank to
exponential
distribution
Transform
domain rank to
exponential
distribution
25%
25%
15%
15%
10%
HOUSING
ACCESS*:
Homelessness
Acceptances (C)
OUTDOOR
PHYSICAL
ENVIRONMENT
*:
Local Area
Problem Score
(D)
CRIME:
Recorded Crime
Rates for:
Violence,
Robbery and
Public Order (A)
Burglary (B)
Vehicle Theft (C)
Criminal
Damage (D)
DISORDER:
Deliberate Fires
(E)
Anti Social
Behaviour
Incidents (F)
5%
5%
Combine with weights to form Multiple Deprivation Measure Score which is ranked to give Multiple Deprivation Measure Rank
* SOA results applied to constituent OAs when creating Multiple Deprivation Measure at the OA level
67
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
The OA level multiple deprivation measure includes all
seven domains of deprivation weighted using the same
proportions as the SOA multiple deprivation measure.
Where OA indicators were not robust (in the Health
Deprivation & Disability, Education Skills and Training, and
Living Environment Domain) the SOA result was assigned
to constituent OAs before combining to form the domain. In
total 86% of the OA Multiple Deprivation Measure was
constructed from OA level data.
Local Government District and Assembly Area
Summaries
Three summary measures are available at the Local
Government District (LGD) and Assembly Area (AA)
geographies.
The flow chart in figure TA.5 shows the components of the
Multiple Deprivation Measure. Indicators asterisked (*) were
included in the OA measure using the relevant SOA result.
In this measure, 100% of the people living in the 10% most
deprived SOAs in Northern Ireland are captured in the
numerator, plus a proportion of the population of those
SOAs in the next two deciles on a sliding scale – that is
95% of the population of the SOA at the 11th percentile,
and 5% of the population of the SOA at the 29th percentile.
Creating Super Output Area Measures
The components of the SOA measures are as described in
the domain sections of the report. The flow chart on page
67 summarises the process.
Creating Electoral Ward measures
The ward measures were created by taking a weighted
average of the SOA results at indicator level for six of the
seven domains and the weighted average of OA results in
the Proximity to Services Domain. Weights were
determined by total population size of SOAs within each
ward. Indicator data were ranked, transformed to a normal
distribution and combined using the same methods
described for the SOA measures. This is a different
methodology from that used to create the NIMDM 2005
ward measures where weighted averages of the constituent
SOA ranks formed the ward score.
It should be noted that the creation of ward summary
measures for Moyle LGD followed a different methodology
due to the relative size of SOAs and wards within this LGD.
Moyle LGD contains fifteen wards and nine SOAs. Three
wards are equivalent to three SOAs while twelve wards
were combined pair-wise to form the remaining six SOAs.
To form the ward summary measures for Moyle LGD it was
not possible therefore to take weighted averages of SOA
indicator data as some SOAs comprised more than one
ward. In these cases the ward is given the SOA score.
This has the effect that pairs of wards within Moyle LGD will
have the same score for six of the seven domains of
deprivation. Rather than arbitrarily assigning different ranks
to such wards, six pairs of wards within Moyle LGD are
given the same rank.
68
Extent: This measure aims to quantify the proportion of a
LGD’s (or AA’s) population living in the most deprived SOAs
in the country.
The aim of this measure is to portray how widespread high
levels of deprivation are in a LGD (or AA). It only includes
LGDs (or AAs) which contain SOAs which fall within the
most deprived 30% of SOAs in Northern Ireland. For
example if an LGD (or AA) had no SOAs within the 30%
most deprived SOAs in Northern Ireland it would be given a
score of 0 and a corresponding rank.
Example:
Consider an LGD with twenty SOAs. Five of the SOAs are
within the most deprived 10% of SOAs in Northern Ireland
on the Multiple Deprivation Measure and a further two are
within the most deprived 30% - one at the 11th percentile
and one at the 29th percentile. All of the populations of the
five SOAs in the most deprived 10%, together with 95% of
the population of the SOA at the11th percentile and 5% of
the population of the SOA at the 29th percentile are
aggregated and divided by the LGD’s total population and
presented as a percentage.
So, the populations of the five SOAs in the most deprived
10% are 2,500, 1,800, 2,000, 1,900 and 2,100. The
population of the SOA at the 11th percentile is 2,200 and
that of the SOA at the 29th percentile is 1,950. The total
LGD population is 50,000. The Extent score is therefore:
((((2500 + 1800 + 2000 + 1900 + 2100) x 1) + (2200 x 0.95)
+ (1950 x 0.05))/50000) x 100 = 25%
The LGD scores are ranked in descending order, so the
LGD with the highest percentage is given a rank of 1.
Scale (Income and Employment Deprived)
The two scale measures are designed to give an indication
of the sheer numbers of people experiencing income
deprivation and employment deprivation at LGD and AA
level. The Income Deprived Scale score is a count of
individuals experiencing income deprivation and the
Employment Deprived Scale score is a count of individuals
experiencing employment deprivation. It is useful to
present both measures as they are real counts of the
individuals experiencing these deprivations.
Example: Consider an LGD with ten SOAs. The number of
people in low income families in each SOA (i.e. the
numerator in the Income Deprivation Domain) are 344, 422,
847, 737, 329, 286, 512, 98, 123 and 146.
The Income Scale score is therefore:
344 + 422 + 847 + 737 + 329 + 286 + 512 + 98 + 123 + 146
= 3844
The Employment Deprived Scale score is generated in the
same way, using the numerator of the Employment
Deprivation Domain. In both cases, the LGD scores are
ranked in descending order, so the LGDs with the largest
number of income or employment deprived people are
ranked 1.
The Income and Employment Deprived Scale can also be
presented as rates of the population to allow comparison
across LGDs and ranked accordingly from most deprived
(rank 1) to least deprived (rank 26). The Income Scale is
expressed as a percentage of the total population while the
Employment Scale is expressed as a percentage of the
working age population.
69
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Annex A: Indicator summary
Source
Year
Adults and children in Income Support households
DSD
2008/09
Adults and children in State Pension Credit households
DSD
2008/09
Adults and children in income based Employment and Support Allowance
households
DSD
2008/09
Adults and children in income based Jobseeker’s Allowance Households
DSD
2008/09
Adults and children in Working Tax Credit households
HMRC
August 2008
Adults and children in Child Tax Credit households21
HMRC
August 2008
Adults and children in Housing Benefit households
LPS and DSD
2008/09
Unemployment claimant count of women aged 18-59 and men aged 18-64
DSD
2008/09
Incapacity Benefit claimants women aged 18-59 and men aged 18-64
DSD
2008/09
Severe Disablement Allowance claimants women aged 18-59 and men aged 18-64
DSD
2008/09
Carer’s Allowance claimants women aged 18-59 and men aged 18-64
DSD
2008/09
Employment and Support Allowance claimants women aged 18-59 and men 18-64
DSD
2008/09 (5 months)
Steps to Work or New Deal Participants women aged 18-59 and men aged 18-64
DEL
2008/09 (6 months)
Years of Potential Life Lost
NISRA/GRO
2004 – 2008
Comparative Illness and Disability Ratio
DSD
2008/09
A combined measure of three indicators:
i) individuals suffering from mood and anxiety disorders, based on prescribing data
ii) suicides
iii) mental health inpatient stays
BSO
NISRA/GRO
DHSSPS
2008/09
1999 – 2008
2003/04 – 2007/08
People registered as having cancer (excluding non-melanoma skin cancers)
NICR
2003 – 2007
Emergency Admission Rate
DHSSPS
2007/08
Low Birth Weight
DHSSPS
2004 – 2008
Children’s Dental Extractions
BSO/DHSSPS
2006/07 – 2008/09
Income Deprivation Domain
21
Employment Deprivation Domain
Health Deprivation & Disability Domain
21
whose equivalised income (excluding housing benefits) is below 60% of the NI median before housing costs.
70
Source
Year
Key Stage 2 Teacher Assessments for English and Maths (and Irish in Irish
medium schools/units)
DE
2006/07 – 2007/08
Proportions of primary pupils attending special schools with Special Educational Needs
stages 3-5 or who are attending primary schools with Special Educational Needs stages 3-5
DE
2006/07 – 2007/08
Absenteeism at Primary Schools (all absences)
DE
2006/07 – 2007/08
Key Stage 3 Teacher Assessments for English and Maths
(and Irish in Irish medium schools/units)
DE
2006/07 – 2007/08
GCSE or equivalent qualifications points score
DE
2005/06 – 2007/08
Proportions of those leaving school not entering Further Education,
Employment or Training
DE
2003/04 – 2007/08
Proportions of 18-21 year olds who have not enrolled in Higher Education
Courses at Higher Education or Further Education establishments
DE
2004/05 – 2007/08
Absenteeism at Post-Primary Schools (all absences)
DE
2006/07 – 2007/08
Proportions of post-primary pupils attending special schools with Special Educational Needs
stages 3-5 or attending post-primary schools with Special Educational Needs stages 3-5
DE
2006/07 – 2007/08
Census
2001
GP premises
BSO
2009
Accident and Emergency hospital
DHSSPS
2009
Dentists
BSO
2009
Opticians
BSO
2009
Pharmacists
BSO
2009
Job Centre or Jobs and Benefits Office
DEL
2008
Post Office
Post Office Ltd
2009
Supermarket / Food Store
Experian
2007
Large Service Centre
DSD
2007
Council Leisure Centre
DCAL
2009
Financial Services
Experian
2007
Other general services
Experian
2007
Education, Skills and Training Deprivation
Sub-Domain: Primary School
Sub-Domain: Post Primary
Sub-Domain: Working Age Adults
Proportion of working age adults (25-59) with no or low levels of qualification
Proximity to Services Domain
71
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Source
Year
SOA level Decent Homes Standard
NIHE
2006
SOA level Housing Health and Safety Rating System
NIHE
2006
NIHE
2005/06 – 2007/08
NIHE
2006
Violence, robbery and public order
PSNI
2004/05 – 2008/09
Burglary
PSNI
2004/05 – 2008/09
Vehicle Theft
PSNI
2004/05 – 2008/09
Criminal Damage
PSNI
2004/05 – 2008/09
Deliberate Primary and Secondary Fires
NIFRS
2004/05 – 2008/09
Anti Social Behaviour Incidents
PSNI
2006/07 – 2008/09
Living Environment Domain
Sub-Domain: Housing Quality
Sub-Domain: Housing Access
SOA level homelessness acceptances
Sub-Domain: Outdoor Physical Environment
SOA level local area problem score
Crime and Disorder Domain
Sub-Domain: Crime
Sub-Domain: Disorder
72
Annex B: Deprivation Steering Group Members
Name
Department / Organisation
Robert Beatty (Chair)
NISRA
Alex Boyle
DOE
Carmel Colohan
DHSSPS
Ian Davidson
DCAL
Gary Ewing (Secretary)
NISRA
Joe Frey
NIHE
Stephanie Harcourt
DETI
Margaret Langhammer
DRD
David Marshall
NISRA
Martin Mayock
DRD
Ruth McAreavey
RDC
Cathryn McBurney
NISRA
Frances McCandless
NICVA
Alan McClelland
OFMDFM
Karen McCullough
DE
Tony McKibben
DSD
Darren McKinstry
Equality Commission
Daniel McSorley
SOLACE
Malcolm Megaw
DARD
Martin Monaghan
DETI
Keith Morrison
DARD
Dave Rogers
DEL
Philip Spotswood
DCAL
73
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
Glossary
AA
A&E
BSO
CD
CHS
CIDR
DARD
DCAL
DE
DEL
DETI
DFP
DHSSPS
DLA
DOE
DRD
DSD
EPES
EU
FE
FESR
GCSE
GP
GRO
HE
HESA
HMO
HMRC
IB
IDAC
IDAOP
IS
JSA
JSA(IB)
KS2
KS3
LGD
LPS
MDM
NI
NICS
NICVA
NIFRS
NIHCS
NIHE
NIMDM
NIMDM 2001
NIMDM 2005
NIMDM 2010
74
Assembly Area
Accident and Emergency
Business Services Organisation
Compact Disc
Continuous Household Survey
Comparative Illness and Disability Ratio
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development
Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure
Department of Education
Department for Employment and Learning
Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment
Department of Finance and Personnel
Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety
Disability Living Allowance
Department of the Environment
Department for Regional Development
Department for Social Development
Electronic Prescribing and Eligibility System
European Union
Further Education
Further Education Statistical Record
General Certificate of Secondary Education
General Practitioner
General Register Office
Higher Education
Higher Education Statistics Agency
Houses in Multiple Occupation
Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Incapacity Benefit
Income Deprivation Affecting Children
Income Deprivation Affecting Older People
Income Support
Job Seeker’s Allowance
Job Seeker’s Allowance (Income based)
Key Stage 2
Key Stage 3
Local Government District
Land and Property Services
Multiple Deprivation Measure
Northern Ireland
Northern Ireland Crime Survey
Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action
Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service
Northern Ireland House Condition Survey
Northern Ireland Housing Executive
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2001
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2005
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
NINIS
NIO
NISRA
NUTS
OA
OFMDFM
PC
PYLL
PSNI
RDC
SAPE
SDA
SDRC
SEN
SOA
SOLACE
TA
UK
WRS
Northern Ireland Neighbourhood Information Service
Northern Ireland Office
Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency
Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics
Output Area
Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister
Parliamentary Constituency
Potential Years of Life Lost
Police Service of Northern Ireland
Rural Development Council
Small Area Population Estimates
Severe Disablement Allowance
Social Disadvantage Research Centre
Special Educational Needs
Super Output Area
Society of Local Authority Chief Executives
Technical Annex
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Worker Registration Scheme
75
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010
References
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2009: Consultation Document, July 2009
www.nisra.gov.uk/deprivation/archive/Updateof2005Measures/NIMDM_2009_Consultation_Document.pdf
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010: Blueprint Document, February 2010
http://www.nisra.gov.uk/deprivation/archive/Updateof2005Measures/NIMDM_2010_Blueprint_Document.pdf
Long-term International Migration Estimates for Northern Ireland (2004-05) - Sources and Methodology, page 7
http://www.nisra.gov.uk/archive/demography/population/migration/NI_Migration_Report(2005).pdf
Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure 2005, May 2005, Section 4, page 13
http://www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk/mapxtreme_deprivation2005/viewData/Deprivation2005Report.pdf
Attendance at grant-aided primary, post-primary and special schools 2007/08: Detailed Statistics
http://www.deni.gov.uk/school_attendance_-_statistical_press_release_200708.pdf
Northern Ireland Housing Executive definition of ‘Houses in Multiple Occupation’
www.nihe.gov.uk/index/yh-home/renting_privately/hmo/definition.htm
The Report of the Inter-Departmental Urban-Rural Definition Group, Statistical Classification and Delineation of Settlements,
February 2005 http://www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk/mapxtreme_towns/Reports/ur_report.pdf &
http://www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk/mapxtreme/viewdata/Compendia_and_Reference/Area_classifications/UrbanRuralClassification2
005.xls
Websites
Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency website
www.nisra.gov.uk
Northern Ireland Neighbourhood Information Service website
www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk
NISRA Deprivation website
www.nisra.gov.uk/deprivation.htm
NISRA Geography website
http://www.nisra.gov.uk/geography/default.asp.htm
NISRA Small Area Population Estimates website http://www.nisra.gov.uk/demography/default.asp125.htm
For more information on the Worker Registration Scheme see UK Border Agency website
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/workingintheuk/eea/wrs/
For more information regarding benefits for non-UK nationals please see http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/index/money-tax-andbenefits/benefits-and-financial-support/beginners-guide-to-benefits/benefits-for-non-uk-nationals.htm
76
The Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency
The Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) was established as an Executive Agency within
the Northern Ireland Department of Finance and Personnel on 1 April 1996. NISRA is the principal source of
official information of socio-economic conditions in Northern Ireland. The Agency provides statistics and social
research services, undertakes the Northern Ireland census of population and administers the civil registration of
births, deaths, marriages and adoptions.
The overall corporate aims of NISRA are to:
■
Provide a statistical and research service to support the decision making by Government in Northern Ireland
and to inform Parliament and the wider community through the dissemination of reliable official statistics; and
■
Administer the marriage laws and to provide a system for the civil registration of births, marriages, adoptions
and deaths in Northern Ireland.
NISRA can be found on the internet at www.nisra.gov.uk
Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency
McAuley House, 2-14 Castle Street, Belfast BT1 1SA
Contact Point
Cathryn McBurney
Email:
[email protected]
Telephone: 028 9034 8112
Fax:
028 9034 8134
If you require this document in another format such as Braille, audio cassette, CD ROM, computer disk or in
another language, please write to:
Email:
[email protected]
Mail:
Neighbourhood Statistics, NISRA, 2-14 Castle Street, Belfast BT1 1SA
Telephone: 028 9034 8112